JK 1274 
.08 
Copy 2 



) 



THE PREVIOUS QUESTION— LIMITATION 

OF DEBATE— CLOTURE I 



SPEECH 



HON. ROBERT L. OWEN 



CXF OKL^tiOM^ 



SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 



FEBRUARY 13, 1915. 



%3> 



81722—14548 



WASHINGTON 
1915 



^ 



^ 



•\ 



V 






. 




K OF 5, 
MAS 5 1915 



C/) IS- 13^ u**VJ 



SPEECH 

OP 

HON. ROBERT L. OWEN 



The Senate had under consideration the motion by the Senator from 
Missouri [Mr. Reed] to amend Rule XXII with the amendment pend- 
ing thereto. 

Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, during the last two years, since 
March, 1913, the Senate of the United States has had one im- 
portant measure after another brought before it for considera- 
tion by the Democratic administrates. There was a prolonged 
and obvious filibuster in the Senate dealing with the tariff bill. 
In order probably to prevent any action upon the FeJeral re- 
serve bill, there was a resolute filibuster even on the question of 
allowing a water supply for the city of S.in Francisco; there 
was a filibuster, using that bill as a general buffer against pro- 
posed progressive legislation, which made it necessary in han- 
dling that bill, as well as in handling the tariff bill and the 
Federal reserve act, for the Senate to meet in the morning and 
to run until 11 o'clock at night. We had no vacation during the 
summer of 1013 or during the summer of 1914, because of the 
vicious filibustering of the Republican Senators. If this method 
of filibustering shall remain as a practice of the Senate 
of the United States, obviously the Congress of the United 
States must remain in continuous session from one year's end 
to another in order to accomplisl even a slight part of what is 
desired by the people of the Suited States, and in order in some 
small degree to enact the important measures which are pre- 
sented to the Senate for consideration on favorable reports 
from the committees of the Senrte. 

I call attention to the large calendar which we have, a cal- 
endar of some thirty-odd pages, representing hundreds of meas- 
ures of importance, which we never arrive at; and even aside 
from the calendar there are matters of the greatest possible im- 
portance, which are not being considered by the body and uot 
being presented by the committees, because it is well known 
that to make reports upon them would be perfectly useless in 
view of this now apparently well-established custom of a con- 
tinuous filibuster against everything desired by the majority 
party. 

This practice of filibustering has not been confined to one side 
of the Chamber only. I agree with the Senator from Nebraska 
[Mr. Norris] that the filibuster quickly passes from one side of 
the Chamber to the other as an exigency may arise, according 
to the desire of those who may be on either side of the aisle. I 
submit, however, a filibuster favoring the people is not to be 
compared to filibuster against the people, although an unjusti- 
fiable parliamentary procedure, except under very extraordinary 
conditions. 

81722—14548 3 



JV 






V 



It has been offered as a criticism of my view with regard 
Co a cloture rule for the Senate, that on one occasion— March 4, 
1911 — when the question arose with regard to the admission 
Of New Mexico to statehood with a corporation-written constitu- 
tion and an unamendahle constitution, and the prevention of 
Arizona at the same time, being admitted to statehood. I did 
not hesitate to use the practice of the Senate to filibuster in 
order to compel a vote of the Senate jointly upon the admission 
of Arizona and New Mexico. My use of this bad practice to 
serve, the people does not in any wise change my opinion about 
the badness of the practice of permitting a filibuster. I acted 
within the practice, but I think the practice is indefensible, and 
I illustrated its vicious character by coercing the Senate and 
compelling it to yield to my individual will. 
,. No one man, no matter how sincere he may be or how patri- 
otic his purpose, should be permitted to take the floor of the 
Senate and keep the floor against the will of every man in the 
« Senate except himself, and coerce and intimidate the Senate. 
To do so is to destroy the most important principle of self- 
government — the right of majority rule. 
^""^I wish to submit a brief sketch of what has been the rule with 
regard to "the previous question." It is an old rule, estab- 
lished for the purpose of preventing an arbitrary and willful 
individual or minority coercing the majority in a parliamentary 
body. I call the attention of the Senate to a work printed in 
.1*390, Lex Pa rlianien tafia, giving the practice in the British 
Parliament. On page 292 of that work this language occurs: 

If upon a debate it be much controverted and much be said against the 
question, any member may move that the question may be first made, 
'Whether that question shall be put or whether it shall be now put, 
which usually is admitted at the instance of any member, especially if 
•it be seconded and insisted upon ; and if that question being put, it pass 
Jn the affirmative then the main question is to be put immediately, and 
no man mar speak anything further to it, cither to add or alter. 

Mr. President, coming down to the days of the Continental 
Congress, I read from page 534 of volume 11, 1778, of the Jour- 
nals of the Continental Congress, giving the rules of that body 
and showing the purpose of the Continental Congress at that 
time to prevent any individual or minority unnecessarily con- 
suming the time of that body. 

G. No Member shall speak more than txoice in any one debate on the 
same day, without leave of the House. 

* * * * «s «■ * * 

10. When a question is before the House no motion shall be received 
unless for an amendment, for the previous question, to postpone the con- 
sideration of the main question or to commit it. 

Sections 13 and 14 read : 

13. The previous question — that is, that the main questron shall be 
not now put — being moved, the question from the Chair shall bo 
that those who are for the previous question say aye and those 
against it, no ; and if there be a majority of ayes, then the main ques- 
tion shall not be then put, but otherwise it shall. 

14. Each Member present shall declare openly and icithout debate 
his assent or dissent to a question by aye and no, trhen required by 
motion of any one Member, whose name shall be entered as having 
made such motion previous to the President's putting the question ; 
the name and vote in such cases shall be entered upon the Journal, 

i and the majority of votes of each State shall be the vote of that State. 

Ljt'hat was the rule of the Continental Congress. The rule 
of the House of Representatives is equally well known to 
clearly and openly recognize the previous question, count a 
grorum, and by a rule fix a time for voting on any question. 

81^22-^14548 



5 

. When it came to drafting the Constitution of the United 
States Mr; Pinckuey proposed in his original draft a provision 
that the yeas and nays of the Members of each House on any 
question shall, at the desire of any certain number of Members, 
be entered on the Journal. 

The committee on detail, page 16G of volume 2 of the records 
of the Federal convention, by Farrand, reported as follows: 

The House of Representatives and the Senate, when it shall be 
acting in a legislative capacity (each House) shall beep a Journal of 
its proceedings, and shall from time to time publish them, * * * 
and the yeas and nays of the Members of each House on any Ques- 
tion sliall, at the desire of any Member, be entered on the Journal, 

That was retained throughout as a part of the Constitution 
and was discussed on Friday the 10th day of August, page 255, 
as follows: 

Mr Gov. Morris urged that if the yeas and nays were proper at all 
any individual ought to be authorised to call for them ; and moved an 
amendment to that effect, saying that the small States would other- 
wise be under a disadvantage, and find it difficult to get a concur- 
rence of one fifth. 

That was voted down unanimously, and the following States: 
New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Penn- 
sylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South 
Carolina, and Georgia voted to agree to the rule that one-fifth 
of the Members might call for the record of the yeas and 
nays as a constitutional right. 

I call the attention of the Senate to the proper interpretation 
of that language. We have ordinarily held to the practice that 
the yeas and nays should be called after the vote had been or- 
dered, but the right to have the yeas and nays immediately 
called under the Constitution of the United States is a consti- 
tutional right. As a Senator from Oklahoma, I have a right, 
being present, if I am supported by one-fifth of the Members of 
this body, to have my vote and the vote of every other Member 
of this body recorded on any pending question without having 
my right denied by an organized filibuster. You can not record 
a vote on the Journal of the Senate unless you take the vote; 
and, therefore, the constitutional right to have my vote recorded 
upon the Journal at the request of one-fifth of the Members 
present carries a present right and not a future expectation or 
vague hope at some unrecorded future time that it may be re- 
corded, when a minority or an individual may permit it. I 
have, therefore, a constitutional right, when supported by one- 
fifth of the Members of this body, to demand the immediate 
talcing of the yeas and nays on any question pending and the 
record of that vote in the Journal of the Senate. 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, will the Senator allow me 
to ask him a question? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator. 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Is it not a truth applicable to everything 
that wherever a right is granted at all it is a right in pnesenti 
and not in future unless the grant is modified by an express 
statement that it is in futuro? 

Mr. OWEN. Absolutely. Now, Mr. President, I want to call 
the attention of the Senate to what has been done in regard to 
this question of cloture or limitation of debate by the Senate 
itself. 

81722—14543 






«* 



0. 

The Senate rules, as established at the beginning of this Gov- 
ernment, adopted in 17S9, are found upon page 20 of the Annals 
of the First Congress, from 1789 to 1791, volume 1. That vol-, 
time contains the rules of the Senate as of that date, from No. 1 
to 19, and those rules expressly provide against the abuse of the 
time of the Senate in a number of particulars. First, in para- 
graph 2, it is provided that — 

2. No Member shall speak to another or othei-wise interrupt the busi- 
ness of the Senate, or read any printed paper, while the Journals or 
public papers are reading, or when any Member is speaking in any 
derate. 

8. Every Member when he speaks shall address the Chair, standing 
in his place, and ichen he has finished shall sit down. 

It obviously contemplated his finishing within some reason- 
able time and taking his seat. 

4. No Member shall speak more than twice in any one debate on 
the same day without leave cf the Senate. 

Showing the intention of the Senate that one man should 
not be allowed to monopolize the time of the Senate. 

Paragraph S rends: 

P. While a question is before the Senate no motion shall be received 
unless for an amendment, for the previous question, or for postponing 
the main question, or to commit it, or to adjourn. 

And paragraph 9 provides: 

9 The previous question being moved and seconded, the question 
from the Chair shall be, "Shall the main question be now put?" And 
If the nays prevail the main question shall not then be put. 

On a divided vote the main question was to be put is a 
necessary consequence that flows from that language. It re- 
quired a majority vote in the negative to prevent the closure 
of debate under the original rules of the Senate. 

Paragraph 11 reads: 

11. When the yeas and nays shall be called for by one-fifth of the 
Members present, each Member called upon shall, unless for special 
reasons he be evented by the Senate, declare openly and icithout debate 
his assent or dissent to the question. 

Mr. President, that was the rule of the Senate up until 1S03. 
At that time the rules were modified so ns to omit the refer- 
ence to the previous question, not by putting in any rule deny- 
ing the right of the previous question, but merely omitting the 
previous question, on the broad theory that courtesy of free 
speech in the Senate would preclude any Member from the 
abuse of the courtesy of free speech extended to him by his 
colleagues, and would preclude a Senator from consuming the 
time of the Senate unduly, unfairly, or impudently, in disregard 
of the courtesy extended to him by his colleagues. The failure 
to move the previous question now is merely a matter of 
covrlesy in this body, and carries with it, so long as it lasts, 
the reciprocal courtesy on behalf of those to whom this cour- 
tesy is extended that they shall not impose upon their col- 
leagues who h^ive extended the courtesy to them of freedom of 
debate or deny their courteous and long-suffering colleagues 
the right to a vote. Freedom of debate' may not under such 
an interpretation be carried to the point of a garrulous abuse 
of the floor of the Senate by the reading of old records and 

idless speechmaking made against time, which has emptied 
tjhe Senate Chamber and destroyed genuine debate in this body. 

81722—14548 



/ 



n 

At the time the previous question was dropped from the written 
rules of the Semite as a right under such written rules there 
had heen no need for the " previous question." The previous 
question had only been moved four times and only used three 
times from 17S0 to 1S0G— that is. during 17 years. 

There is no real debate in the Senate. Occasionally a Senator 
makes n speech that is worth listening to — occasionally, and 
only occasionally. The fact is that even speeches of the great- 
est value which are delivered on this floor have little or no- 
audience now because of this gross abuse of the patience of 
the Senate, which has been brought to a point where men are 
no longer willing to be abused by loud-mouthed vociferation of 
robust-lunged partisans confessedly speaking against time in 
a filibuster, and are unwilling to keep their seats on this floor 
to listen to an endless tirade intended not to instruct the Sen- 
ate, intended not to advise the Senate, intended not for legiti- 
mate debate, not for an honest exercise of freedom of speech, 
but for the sinister, ulterior, half-concealed purpose of killing 
time in the Senate and thereby preventing the Senate from act- 
ing, thus establishing a minority veto under the pretense, the 
bald pretense, the impudent and false pretense, of freedom of 
debate. 

This courtesy in the Senate was not greatly abused prior to 
the war, nor until the fierce recent conflict began between the 
plutocracy and monopoly and the common people. Its abuse 
during the last century led, however, to various proposals by 
various distinguished Members of this body of cloture in various 
forms. 

The first one that I care to call attention to is that of Mr. 
Clay, in 1S41. in connection with which Mr. Henry Clay said 
among other things — this was on the 12th of July, 1S41 — that— 

lie was ready at any moment to bring forward and support a measure 
which should give to the majority the control of the business of the 
Senate cf the United States. Let them denounce it as much as they 
pleased, its advocates, unmoved by any of their denunciations and 
threats, standing firm in support of the interests which he believed the 
country demands, for one he was ready for the adoption of a rule 
Which would place the business of the Senate under the control of a 
majority cf the Senate. 

In the first session in the Thirty-first Congress, July 27, 1S50, 
Mr. Douglas, then a Senator of the United States, submitted the 
following motion for consideration : 

Resolved, That the following be, and the came Is, adopted as a stand- 
ing rule of the Senate: 

That the previous question shall be~ admitted when demanded by a 
majority of the Members of the Senate present, and its effect shall be 
to put an end to all debate and bring the Senate to a direct vote, first, 
upon a motion to commit, if such motion shall have been made — 

And so forth. 

Mr. Hale, on April 4, 18G2, brought in a resolution of like 
purport; Mr. Wade, on June 21, 1S84, proposed a like resolution; 
Mr. Pomeroy, on February 13, I860; Mr. Hamlin, on March 10, 
1S70; and various other Senators. I ask, without reading these 
various proposals, to place them in the Pecokd for the informa- 
tion of the Senate of the United States. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ransdell in the chair). 
Without objection, it will be so ordered. 
81722—14548 



The matter referred to is as follows: 

LIMITATION OF DEBATE. 

[1st sess. 31st Cong., J. of S., 482, July 27, 1850.1 
Mr. Douglas submitted the following motion for consideration : 
Resolved, That the following he, and the same is. adopted as a stand- 
ing rule of the Senate. 

That the previous question shall he admitted when demanded by a 
majority of the Members «f the Senate present, and its effect shall be 
to put an end to all debate, and bring the Senate to a direct vote, 
first, upon a motion to commit, if such motion shall have been made; 
and if this motion does not prevail, then, second, upon amendments 
reported by a committee, if any ; then, third, upon pending amend- 
ments ; and. finally, where such questions shall, or when uoue shall 
have been offered, or when none may be pending, then it shall he upon 
the main question or questions leading directly to a final decision of 
the subject matter before the Senate. On a motion for the previous 
question, and prior to the seconding of the same, a call of the Senate 
shall be in order ; but after a majority shall have seconded such 
motion no call shall be in order prior to a decision of the main ques- 
tion. On a previous question there shall be no debate. All inci- 
dental questions arising after a motion shall have been made for the 
previous question and, pending such motion, shall be decided, whether 
on appeal or otherwise, without debate. 

(Aug. 28. The resolution was laid on the table (ib., 588).) 

[2d sess. 37th Cong., J. of S., 370, Apr. 4, 1862.] 
Mr. Hale submitted the following resolution for consideration : 
Resolved, That the following he added to the rules of the Senate : 
The Senate may, at any time during the present rebellion, by a vote 
of a majority of the Members present, fix a time when debate on any 
matter pending before the Senate shall cease and terminate; and the 
Senate shall, when the time fixed for terminating' debate arrives, pro- 
ceed to vote, without debate, on the measure and all amendments .pend- 
ing and that may be offered. 

[1st sess. 38th Cong., J. of S., 601, June 21, 1864.] 
Mr. Wade submitted the following resolution for consideration : 
" Resolved, That during the remainder of the present session of Con- 
gress no Senator shall speak more than once on any one question before- 
the Senate; nor shall such speech exceed 10 minutes, without leave of 
the Senate expressly given ; and when such leave is asked it shall be 
decided by the Senate without debate ; and it shall be the duty of the 
President to see that this rule is strictly enforced." 

[3d sesj. 40th Cong.. J of S., 256, Feb. 13, I860.] 
Mr. Pomeroy submitted the following resolution, which was ordered 
to be printed : 

"Resolved, That the following be added to the standing rules of the 
Senate : 

" ' Rule — . While the motion for the previous question shall not be 
entertained in the Senate, yet the Senators, by a vote of three-fifths of 
the Members, may determine the time when debate shall close upon 
any pending proposition, and then the main question shall be taken 
by a vote of the Senate in manner provided for under existing rules.' " 
[2d sess. 41st Ccng., J. of S., 347, Mar. 10. 1870. J 
Mr. Hamlin submitted the following resolution for consideration : 
" Resolved, That whenever any question shall have been under con- 
sideration for two days it shall he competent, without debate, for the 
Senate, bv a two-thirds majority, to fix a time, not less than one day 
thereafter, when the main question shall be taken ; but each Senator 
who shall offer an amendment shall be allowed five minutes to speak 
upon the same, and one Senator a like time in reply." 
[Ib., 412, Mar 25, 1870.] 
Mr. Wilson submitted the following motion for consideration : 
Ordered, That the Select Committee on Rules be instructed to con- 
sider the expediency of adopting a rule for the remainder of the session 
providing that whenever any bill has been considered for two days tho 
question on ordering it to a third reading may be ordered by a two- 
thirds vote of the Senators present and* voting. 
[Ib., 4 65, Apr. 7, 1870.] 
The Senate next proceeded to consider (the above) ; and 
On motion of Mr. Edmunds, 

Ordered, That the said resolution be passed over. 
81722 — 14548 



9 

[lb., 492, Apr. 14, 1870.] 

TUG Senate next resumed the consideration of too resolution sub- 
mitted by Mr. Wilson on tbe 25th of March last, instructing the Select 
Commitiee on the Revision of the Rules to consider the expediency of 
adopting a rule for the remainder of the session fixing a time when the 
question on ordering a bill to a third reading shall be put ; and 

The resolution was agreed to. 

[2d sess. 41st Cong., J. of S., 778, % June 9, 1870.] 

Mr. romeroy submitted tho following resolution for consideration, 
which was ordered to be printed : 

Resolved, That the thirtieth rule of the Senate be amended by add- 
ing thereto the following: - . 

"And any pending amendment to an appropriation bill may be laid 
on the lab'c without affecting the bill. 

" It shall he in order at any time when an appropriation bill is 
under consideration, by a two-thirds vote, to order the termination of 
debate at a time fixed in respect to any item or amendment thereof 
then under consideration, which order shall be acted upon without 
debate. 

[2d sesj 42d Cong., J. of S., Apr. 1, 1872.] 

Mr. Tomcroy submitted the following resolution for consideration : 
Resolved, That upon any amendment to general appropriation bills 

remarks upon the same by any one Senator shall be limited to five 

minutes. 

[2d sess. 42d Cong.. J. of S., G14, Apr. 20.] 

Mr. Scott submitted the folowing resolution, which was ordered to 
be printed : 

Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order, pending 
an appropriation bill, to move to confine debate on the pending bill 
nnd amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator on the pending 
motion, and the motion to limit debate shall be decided without debate. 

[lb.. G30, Apr. 29, 1872.] 

On motion by Mr. Scott, 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by him 
on the 20th instant, to confine debate on appropriation bills and amend- 
ments thereto for toe remainder of the session ; and the resolution hav- 
ing been modified by Mr. Scott to read as follows : 

" Resolved, That during tbe present session it shall be in order, 
pending an appropriation bill, to move to confine debate on amend- 
ments thereto to five minutes by any Senator en the pending motion, 
and the motion to limit debate shall 'be decided without debate." 

After debate, 

On motion by Mr. Vickers, to amend the resolution by inserting after 
the word " thereto," the words " germane to the subject matter of the 
bill." 

I Several proposed amendments to this part of the resolution are 
omitted.] 

On motion by Mr. Edmunds, to amend the resolution by adding 
thereto the following : 

"And no amendment to any such bill making legislative provisions 
other than such as directly relate to the appropriations contained in 
the bill shall he received." 

It was determined in the affirmative — yeas 25, nays 19. 

[The names are omitted.] 

So the amendment was agreed to. 

The resolution having been further amended on motion of Mr. Scott, 
on the question to agree thereto as amended in the following words: 

"Resolved, That during ti:e present session it shall be in order to novo 
a recess ; and pending an appropriation bill to move to confine debate 
on amendment thereto to five minutes bv any Senator on tbe pending 
motion, and such motions shall be decided without debate ; and no 
nmendment to any such bill making legislative provisions other than 
such as directly relate to the appropriations contained in the bill shall 
be received." 

It was determined in the affirmative, {^y|~~~~ — ~" ~ 13 

[The names are omitted.] 
So the resolution was agreed to. 
81722—14548 



10 

[3d scss. 42d Cong;, J. of S., G15, March 18, 1873.] 

Mr. Wright submitted the following resolution for consideration, 
which was ordered to be printed : 

"Resolved, That the Committee on the Revision of the Rules he in* 
ctructed to inquire into the propriety of so amending- the rules as to 
provide — 

" First. That debate shall be confined and be relevant to the subject 
matter before the Senate. 

" Second That the previous question may be demanded either by a 
majority vote or in some modified form. 

• "Third. For taking up bills in their regular order on the calendar; 
for their disposition in such order ; prohibiting special orders ; and re- 
quiring that bills not finally disposed of when thus called shall go 
to the loot of the calendar unless otherwise directed." 
[lb., GIG, Mar. 19, 1873.] 

On motion by Mr*. Wright, that the Senate proceed to the consider- 
ation of the resolution submitted by him on the 17th instant instruct- 
ing the Se.ect Committee on the Revision of the Rules to inquire into 
the propriety of so amending the rules of the Senate as' to confine debate 
to the subject matter before the Senate, to provide for a previous ques- 
tion, and the order of the consideration of bills on the calendar, and 
the disposition thereof ; 

After debate, 

It was determined in the ne g ativo '\Navsl~V~~~~ io 

[The names are omitted.] 

So the motion Io proceed to the consideration of the said resolution 
was not agreed to. 

[Congressional Record, 3d sess. 42d Cong. (spec, sess.) 113-117.] 
[lb., G17, Mar. 20, 1873.] 

Mr. Wright submitted the following resolution for consideration; 
which was ordered 1o»be printed: 

"Resolved, That the following be added to the rules of the Senate: 

"Rule — . No debate shall be in order unless it relate to, or be perti- 
nent to, the question before 1he Senale. 

" Rule — . Debate may be closed at any time upon any bill or measure 
by the order of two-thirds of the Senators present, after notice of 24 
hours to that effect. 

" Rule — . All bills shall be placed upon the calendar in their order, 
and si all be disposed of in such order unless postponed by the order of 
the Senafe. All special orders are m'ohibited, except by unanimous con- 
sent ; and bills postponed shall, unless otherwise ordered, go to the foot 
of the calendar. 

[lb., G18, Mar. 21, 1873.] 

On motion by Mr. Wright, that the Senate proceed to the considera- 
tion of the resolution yesterday submitted by him, providing additional 
rules for the Senate. 

After debate, 

Ordered, That the further consideration of the subject be postponed 
to the first Monda^ of December next. 

[Congressional Record, 3d sess. 42d Cong. (spec, sess.), 135-137.] 
[1st sess. 43d Cong., J. of S., 532, May G. 1874.] 

Mr. Edmunds submitted the following resolution, which was referred 
to the Select Committee on the Revision of the Rules : 

"Resolved, Tfcat the eleventh rule of the Senate be amended by add- 
ing thereto the following words : " Nor shall such debate be allowed 
upon any motion to dispose of a pending matter and proceed to con- 
sider another. When a question is under consideration the debate 
thereon shall be germane to such question or to the subject to which it 

relates." 

[lb., 578, May 15, 1874.] 

Mr. Ferry of Michigan, from the Select Committee on the Revision 
of the Rules, to whom was referred the resolution submitted by Mr 
Edmunds the Gih instant to amend the eleventh rule of the Senate, 
reported it with an amendment. 

[2d sess. 43d Cong., ,T. of S., 12S, Jan. IS, 1S75.] 

Mr. Morrill of Maine, submitted the following resolution for consid- 
eration, which was ordered to be printed : 

"Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at 
any time to move a recess, and, pending an appropriation bill, to move 
To confine debate on amendments thereto to five minutes uy any Senator 
on the pending motion, and such motions shall be decided without 
debate." 

81722—14548 



II 

Tib., 134, Jan. 19, 1875.] 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution, yesterday submitted 
by Mr. Morrill of Maine, to limit debate on amendments to appropri- 
ation bills ; and 

After debate, 

The resolution was agreed to, as follows : 

"Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at any 
time to move a recess, and, pending an appropriation bill, to move 
to confine debate en amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator 
on the pending motion, and such motion shall be decided without 
debate." 

(Congressional Record., 2d sess., 43d Cong., 530-5 <0.) 

[1st sess. 44th Cong., J. of S., 243, Feb. 23, 1S7G.] 

Mr. Morrill of Maine submitted the following resolution for consid- 
eration, which was ordered to he printed: * 

" Resolved, That during tbe present session it shall be in order at 
any time to move a recess, and, pending an appropriation bill, to move 
to confine debate on amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator 
on the pending motion, and such motion shall be decided without 
debate." 

rib., 253, Feb. 29, 1876.] 

On motion by Mr. Morrill, of Maine, 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution yesterday submitted 
by him to confine debate on amendments to appropriation bills ; and, 
baving been amended en motion by Mr. Morrill, of Maine, 

On motion by Mr. Eayard, to further amend the resolution by add- 
ing thereto the following : 

•' But no amendment to an appropriation bill shall be in order which 
is not germane to such a bill," 

After debate. 

It was determined in the negative, {^ays! "~"~~" ~1~TI""~~ 28 

[The names are omitted.] 

So the amendment was not agreed to. 

No further amendment being proposed, the resolution as amended was 
agreed to, as follows : 

"Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at any 
time to move a recess, and. pending an appropriation bill, to move to 
confine debate en amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator 
on the pending motion, and such motions shall be decided without 
debate." 

[2d sess. 45th Cong., J cf S., 314, Mar. 20, 1878.] 

Mr. Windom submitted the following resolution for consideration : 

" Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at 
any time pending an appropriation bill to move to confine debate on 
amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator on the pending 
moUcn, and such motion shall be decided without debate." 

[2d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 319, Mar. 21. 1878.] 

On motion by Mr. Windom, 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution yesterday submitted 
by him, providing for a limitation of debate on amendments to appro- 
priation bills, and 

The resolution was agreed to. 

[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 32, Dec. 5, 1878.] 

Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution for consideration : 

'■' Resolved, That to-day, at 1 o'clock, the Senate will proceed to the 
consideration of the calendar, and bills that are not objected to shall 
be taken up in their order, and each Senator shall be entitled to speak 
ence, and for five minutes only, unless, upon motion, the Senate should 
at any time otherwise order ; and tbe objection may be interposed at 
any stage of the proceedings ; and this order shall take precedence of 
special orders or unfinished business unless otherwise ordered." 

(The resolution went over, objection being made.) 

[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 114, Jan. 14, 1879.] 

Mr. Anthony submittel the following resolution, which was consid- 
ered, by unanimous consent, and agreed to : 

"Resolved, That on Friday next, at 1 o'clock, the Senate will pro- 
ceed to the consideration of the calendar, and bills that are not objected 
to shall be taken up in their order,, and each Senator shall be entitled to 
speak once, and for five minutes only, unless, upon motion, the Senate 
should at any time otherwise order, and the objection may be interposed 
at any stage of the proceedings." 

(Congressional Record, 3d sess. 45th Cong., 427.) 
81722—14548 



12 

[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 138, Jan. 20, 1879.] 

Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution, which was consid- 
ered, by unanimous consent, and agreed to : 

" Resolved, That at the conclusion of the morning business for each 
day after this day the Senate will proceed to the consideration of the 
calendar, and continue such consideration until half past 1 o'clock, and 
bills that are not objected to shall be taken up in their order, and each 
Senator shall be entitled to speak once, and for five minutes only, unless, 
upon motion, the Senate should at any time otherwise order, and the 
objection may be interposed at any stage of the proceedings." 
[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 189, Jan. 30, 1879.] 

Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution for consideration : 

"Resolved, That the order of the Senate of January 20. 1879, relative 
to the consideration of bills on the calendar shall not be suspended 
unless by unanimous consent or upon one day's notice." 

[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 325, Feb. 20, 1879.] 

Mr. Windom submitted the following resolution for consideration : 

"Resolved, That di'ring the present session it shall be in order at any 
time pending an appropriation bill to move to confine debate on amend- 
ments thereto to five minutes by any Senator on the pending motion, 
and such motion shall be decided -without debate.", 

[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 373, Feb. 25, 1879.] 

On motion by Mr. Allison, 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by Mr. 
Windom on the 20th instant to confine debate on amendments to gen- 
eral appropriation bills ; and 

The resolution was agreed to. 

[2d sess. 46th Cong., J. of S., 594, May 22, 1880.] 

The hour of half past 12 o'clock having arrived, the President pro 
tempore asked the Senate to place its construction upon the order of 
February 5, 1880, and known as the "Anthony rule," and submitted 
the following preposition : " Does the consideration of the calendar con- 
tinue until half past 1 o'clock, notwithstanding the change of the hour 
of meeting of the Senate?" 

[3d sess. 46th Cong., J. of S., 244, Feb. 12, 1881.] 

On motion by Mr. Morgan, 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by him the 
10th instant, limiting debate on a motion to proceed to the considera- 
tion of a bill or resolution ; and having been modified on the motion of 
Mr. Morgan, the resolution as modified was agreed to, as follows : 

" Resolved, That for the remainder of the present session, on a motion 
to take up a bill or resolution for consideration, at the present or at a 
future time, debate shall be limited to 15 minutes, and no Senator shall 
speak to such motion more than once, or for a longer time than 
minutes." 

[3d sess. 46th Cong., J. of S., 234, Feb. 10, 1881.] 

Mr. Morgan submitted the following resolution for consideration : 

"Resolved, That on a motion to take up a bill or resolution for con- 
sideration at the present or at a future time debate shall be limited to 
15 minutes, and no Senator shall speak to such motion oftener than 
once, or for a longer time than 5 minutes." 

[1st sess. 47th Cong., J. of S., 446, Mar. 20, 1882.] 

On motion of Mr. Anthony, to amend the order of the Senate known 
as the "Anthony rule," so as to extend the time for the consideration of 
the calendar of bills and resolutions until 2 o'clock p. m., it was deter- 
mined in the affirmative. 

[1st sess. 47th Cong., J. of S., 632, Apr. 26, 1882.] 

Mr. Edmunds submitted the following resolution for consideration, 
which was ordered to be printed : 

" Resolved, That the special rule of the Senate for the consideration 
of matters on the calendar under limited debate be, and the same is 
hereby, abolished." 

Mr. Hoar submitted the following resolution for consideration, which 
was ordered to be printed : 

" Resolved, That the resolve known as the "Anthony rule " shall not 
hereafter be so construed as to authorize the consideration of any meas- 
ure under a limitation of debate of five minutes, or to speaking but once 
by each Senator after objection." 
81722—14548 



13 

' . . . , .{2d sess. 47th Cong.. J. of S., 282, Feb. 3, 1883.] 

Mr. Hale submitted the following resolution for consideration, which 

was ordered to be printed : 

"Resolved, That upon each amendment hereafter offered to the bill 

"entitled 'An act to reduce internal revenue taxation,' each Senator may 

speak once for five minutes, and no more." 

[2d sess. 47th Cong., J. of S., 396, Feb. 23, 1883.] 
Mr. Hale submitted the following resolution for consideration : 

• "Resolved, -That during the present session it shall be in order at any 
time pending an appropriation bill to move to confine debate on amend- 
ments thereto to five minutes by any Senator on the pending motion, and 
said motion shall be decided without debate." 

list sess. 48th Cong., J. of S„ 354, Feb. 26, 1884.] 

Mr. Harris submitted the following resolution, which was referred to 
the Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed: 

"Resolved, That the seventh rule of the Senate be amended by adding 
thereto the following words : 

" * The Presiding Officer may at any time lay, and it shall be in order 
at any time for a Senator to move to lay, before the Senate any bill or 
other matter sent to the Senate by the President or the House of Rep- 
resentatives, and any question pending at that time shall be suspended 
for this purpose. Any motion so made shall be determined without 
debate.' " 

Mr. Harris submitted the following resolution, which was referred to 
the Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed : 

"Resolved, That the eighth rule of the Senate be amended by adding 
thereto the following words : 

" 'All motions made before 2 o'clock to proceed to the consideration 
of any matter shall be determined without debate.' " 

[1st sess. 48th Cong., J. of S., 442, Mar. 19, 1884.] 

On motion by Mr. Harris. 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution to amend the eighth 
rule ; and 

• The resolution was agreed to, as follows : 

" Resolved, That the eighth rule of the Senate be amended by adding 
thereto the following words : 'All motions made before 2 o'clock to 
proceed to the consideration of any matter shall be determined without 
debate.' " 

On motion by Mr. Harris, 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolutions reported from the 
Committee on Rules on the 7th instant to amend the tenth rule, and 
havinec been amended on the motion of Mr. Harris, from the Committee 
on Rules, by inserting, after the word '< order," the words "or to proceed 
to the consideration of other business." 

Ti'e resolution as amended was agreed to, as follows : 

" Resolved, That the tenth rule of the Senate be amended by adding 
thereto the following words : 'And all motions to change such order 
or to proceed to the consideration of other business shall be decided 
without debate.' " 

[1st sess. 48th Cong., J. of S., 431, Mar. 17, 1884.] 

Mr. Harris, from the Committee on Rules, to which was referred the 
resolution submitted by him February 26, 1884, to amend the seventh 
rule of the Senate, reported it without amendment. 

The Senate proceeded, by unanimous consent, to consider the said 
resolution ; and 

Resolved, That the Senate asrree thereto. 

Mr. Harris, from the Committee on Rules, to which was referred the 
resolution submitted by him February 26. 1884. to amend the eighth 
rule of the Senate, reported it without amendment. 

Mr. Harris, from tbe Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution for consideration : 

"Resolved. That the tenth rule of the Senate be amended by adding 
thereto the following words : 'And all motions to change such order shall 
he decided without debate. ' " 

[2d sess. 48th Cong., J. of S., 359, Feb. 24, 1885.] 

Mr. Alliscn submitted the following order for consideration, which 
was ordered to be printed : 

Ordered, That during the remainder of the present session of the 
Senate it shall be in order to move at any time that debate on any 
amendment oi all amendments to any appropriation bill then before the 
Senate be limited to five minutes for each Senator, and that no Senator 
Eball speak more than once on the same amendment in form or eub- 
81722—14548 



14 

stance. The Question on such motion shall he determined without 
debate 

f2d sess. 48th Cong., J of S., 380, Feb. 26, 1885.] 

The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the order submitted 
by Mr. Allison on the 24th instant to limit debate to five minutes on 
amendments to appropriation bills for the remainder of the present 
session. 

On motion by Mr. Plumb, 

Ordered, That the further consideration thereof be postponed to to- 
morrow. 

[1st sess. 49th Cong., J. of S., 503, Apr. 1, 188G.] 

Mr. Ingalls submitted the following resolution, which was referred to 
the Committee on Rules : 

"Resolved, That Rule XIII be amended by striking out the words 
* without, debate,' in the last sentence of clause 1." 

[1st sess. 49th Cong., J. of S., 904, June 14, 1886.] 

Mr. Edmunds submitted the following resolution, which was referred 
to the Committee on Rules : 

"Resolved, That the last paragraph of the first clause of Rule XIII 
be amended so as to read as follows : 

" 'Any motion to reconsider may be laid on the table without affecting 
the question in reference to which the same is made, and if laid on the 
table it shall be a final disposition of the motion.' " 

[1st sess. 49th Cong., J. of S., 945, June 21, 1886.] 

Mr. Frye, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following reso- 
lution, which wa3 considered, by unanimous consent, and agreed to : 

"Resolved, That the last paragraph of clause 1, Rule XIII, is hereby 
amended by striking out the words ' without debate.' 

Mr. Frye, from the Committee en Rules, to whom were referred the 
fcPowing resolutions, reported adversely hereon : 

The resolution submitted by Mr. Ingalls April 1, 1886, to amend 
clause 1 of Rule XIII of the Senate ; and 

The resolution submitted by Mr. Edmunds on the 14th instant to 
amend clause 1 of Rule XIII of the Senate. 

Ordered. That they be postponed indefinitely. 

[2d sess. 49th Cong.. J. of S., 387, Feb. 21, 1887.] 

Mr. Cameron submitted the following resolution for consideration, 
which was ordered to be printed : 

" Resolved, That during the remainder of this session no Senator shall 
speak on any question more than once, and shall confine his remarks 
to five minutes' duration." 

[2d sess. 49th Cong., J. of S., 400, Feb. 22, 1887.] 

The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the resolution 
yesterday submitted by Mr. Cameron, limiting debate during the re- 
mainder of the session ; 

When, 

Mr. Edmunds raised a question of order, viz, that the resolution would 
change the standing rules of the Senate, of which proper notice had 
not been given, as required by the fortieth rule : and 

The President pro tempore sustained the point of order. 

[1st sess. 50th Cong., J. of S., 315, Feb. 14, 1888.] 

Mr. Blackburn submitted the following resolution, which was referred 
to the Committee on Rules : 

"Resolved, That it shall not be in order, except by unanimous consent, 
for the Committee on Appropriations to report to the Senate for con- 
sideration or action any general appropriation bill without having had 
such bill under consideration for a period of 10 days or more." 

[1st sess. 50th Cong., J. of S., 829, May 16, 1888.] 
Mr. Edmunds submitted the following resolution, which was referred 
to the Commit lee on Rules : 

"Resolved, That paragraph 3 of Rule XVI be amended by adding 
thereto the following : 

" Whenever any general appropriation bill originating in the House 
of Representatives shall be undei consideration, it shall be the duty of 
the presiding officer to cause to be stricken out of such bill all pro- 
visions therein of a general legislative character other than such as 
relate to the disposition of the moneys appropriated therein; but such 
order of the presiding officer shall be subject to an appeal to the Senate 
as in other cases of questions of order." 
81722—14548 



15 

fist sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 250, Apr. 23, 1890.] 

Mr. Chandler submitted the following resolution, which was referred 
to the Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed : 

"Resolved, That the following be adopted as a standing rule of the 
Senate : .... 

" * Whenever a bill or resolution reported from a committee is under 
consideration the Senate may, on motion, to be acted on without debate 
or dilatory motions, order that on a day, not less than six days after 
the passage of the order, debate shall cease and the Senate proceed to 
disposo of the bill or resolution ; and when said day shall arrive, at 3 
o'c'ock the vote shall be forthwith taken without debate or dilatory 
motions upon any amendments to the bill or resolution and upon the 
passage thereof. 

" ' Whenever a quorum of Senators shall not vote on any roll call the 
presiding officer at the request of any Senator shall cause to be entered 
upon the Journal the names of all the Senators present and not voting, 
and such Senators shall be deemed and taken as in attendance and 
present as part of the nuorum to do business: and declaration of the 
result of the voting shall be made accordingly.' " 

[1st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 431, July 16, 1890.] 

Mr. Allison submitted the following resolution for consideration, 
which was ordered to be printed : 

''Resolved, That during the remainder cf the present session of Con- 
gress it shall be in order to move at any time that debate on any 
amendment or all amendments to any appropriation bill then before the 
Secate be limited to five minutes for each Senator, and that no Senator 
shall speak more than once on the same amendment in form or sub- 
stance. The question on such motion shall be determined without de- 
bate." 

[1st sess. olst Cong., J. of S., 449, Aug. 1, 1800.] 

Mr. Blair submitted the following resolution, which was ordered to 
be pr'nted : 

"Resolved, That the Committee on Rules be instructed to report a 
rule within four days providing for the incorporation of the previous 
question or pome method for limiting and closing debate ia the parlia- 
mentary procedure of the Senate. 

[1st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 450, Aug. 9, 1890.] 

The Tres'dent pro tempore laid before the Senate the resolution 
yesterday submitted by Mr. Blair, as follows : 

"Resolved, That the Committee en Rules be instructed to report a 
rule within four days providing for the incorporation of the previous 
question or some method for limiting and closing debate in the parlia- 
mentary procedure of the Senate." 

O dered. That it be referred to the Committee on Rules. 

(Cong. Rec, 1st sess. 51st Cong., 8048-8050.) 

[1st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 480, Aug. 9, 1890.] 

Mr. Hoar submitted the following resolution, which was referred to 
the. Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed : 

"Resclced, That the Rules of the Senate be amended by adding as 
follows : 

" When any bill or resolution shall have been under consideration for a 
reasonable time it shall be in order for any Senator to demand that debate 
thereon be closed. If such demand be seconded by a majority of the 
Senators present, the question shall forthwith be taken thereon without 
further debate, and the pending measure shall take precadence of all 
other business whatever. If the Senate shall decide to close debate, the 
question shall be put upon the pending amendments, upon amendments 
of which notice shall then be given, and upon the measure in its suc- 
cessive stages, according to the rules of the Senate, but without further 
debate, except that every Senator who may des-ire shall be permitted 
to speak upon the measure net more, than once and not exceeding 30 
minutes. 

"After such demand shall have been made by any Senator, no other 
motion shall be in order until the same shall have been voted upon by 
the Senate, unless the same shall fail to be seconded. 

"After the Senate shall have decided to close debate, no mot'on shall 
be in order but a motion to adjourn or to take a recess, when such 
motion shall be seconded by a majority of the Senate. When either 
of said mot'ons shall have been lost, or shall have failed of a second, it 
shall not be in order to renew the same until one Senator shall have 
spoken upon the pending measure or one vote on the same shall have 
intervened." 

81722—14548 



16 

[1st sess. 51st Cong., .7. of S., 463, Aug. 12, 1880.] 

Mr. 'Edmunds' submitted the following order for consideration; which 
was ordered to be printed : 

Ordered, That during the consideration of House bill OHO. entitled 
"An act to reduce the revenue and equalize duties on imports, and for 
other purposes," no Senator shall speak more than once, and not longer 
than five minutes, on or in resnect of any one item in said bill or any 
amendment proposed thereto without leave of the Senate, such leave to 
be granted or denied without debate and without any other motion or 
proceeding other than such as relates to procuring a quorum when it 
shall appear on a division, or on the yeas and navs beinar rak ■->. iai 
a voting quorum is net present ; and until said bill shall have been 
gone through with to the point of a third reading no general motion in 
respect of said bill other than to take it up shall be in order. 

All appeals pending the matter aforesaid shall be determined at once, 
and without debate. 

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Rule XL, that the foregoing order 
will be offered for adoption in the Senate. 

It is proposed to susoend for the foregoing stated purpose the fol- 
low'n? rules, namely: V, VIII, IX, X, XII, XVIII, XIX, XXII, 
XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL. 

[1st sess., 51st Cong., J. of S., 483, Aug. 12, 1890.] 

Mr. Blair submitted the following resolution for consideration, 
which was ordered to be printed : 

Resolved, That the following rule be adopted to fix the limit of der 
bate, namely : 

Rule — . When a proposition has been under debate two days and not 
less than four hours, which" shall be determined by the pres'ding officer 
without debate, it shall be in . order to move the previous question, 
unless the Senate shall otherwise fix the time when debate shall cease 
and the vote be taken ; and in any case arising under tins rule uie 
Senator in charge of the measure shall have one hour in which to close 
the debate. 

During the last 14 days preceding the time fixed by law or by con- 
current resolution passed by the Senate for the end of the session, a 
majority of the Senate may close the debate at any time, subject to 
the right of the Senator in charge of the measure: and any motion for 
the previous question, or to limit debate and to fix the time for the 
vote to be taken, shall cease in one hour and be subject to the Anthony 

[1st sess. 51st Cong., .T. of S., 0^3, Aug. 12, 1800.] 

Mr. Quay submitted the following resolution for consideration, which 
was ordered to be printed : 

" Resolved, That .during the present session' of Congress the Senate 
will nor take up for consideration any legislative business other than 
the pending bill (the tariff bill) and general appropriation bills, bills 
relating to public buildings and public lands, and Senate or concurrent 
resolutions. 

"Resolved, That the consideration of all bills other than such as are 
mentioned in the foregoing resolution is hereby postponed until the 
session of Congress to be held on the first Mouday in December, 1890. 

"Resolved, That the vote on the Dendini- bill and all amendments 
thereto shall be taken on the 30th day of August instant at 2 o'clock 
p. m., the voting to continue without further debate until the considera- 
tion of the bill and the amendments is comple^vd. 

[1st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 4G5, Aug. 13, 1890.] 

The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the order and 
resolutions yesterday submitted, as fellows: 

" Order by Mr. Edmunds, to limit debate on the pending bill to re- 
duce the revenue and equalize duties on imports and the amendments 
proposed thereto. 

Resolution by Mr. Blair, to amend the rules so as to fix a limit to 
debate. 

Resolution by Mr. Quay, prescribing the measure to be considered 
during the remainder of the present session ; and. 

Ordered, That they be referred to the Committee on Rules. 
[1st sess. 51st Cong.. J. of S., 471. Aug. 1G, 1890.] 

Mr. Quay gave notice in writing, pursuant to Rule XL, that he would 
offer the following orders -for adoption by the Senate: 

Ordered, 1. That during the present session of Congress the Senate 
will not take up for consideration any legislative business other than 
the pending bill (H. R. 9416), conference reports, general appropriation 
81722—14548 



17 

bills, pension bills, bills relating to the puMic lands, to the United 
States courts, to the Postal Service, to at,iiculture and forestry, to 
public buildings, and Senate or concurrent resolutions. 

Ordered. 2. That the consideration of all bills other than such as 
are mentioned in the foregoing order is hereby postponed until the 
session of Congress to be held on the first Monday of December, 1800. 

Ordered, 3. That a vote shall be taken on the bill (H. R. 9416) now 
under consideration in the Senate and upon amendments then pend- 
ing, without further debate, on the 30th day of August, 1890, the vot- 
ing to commence at 2 o'clock p. m. on said day and continue on that 
and subsequent days, to the exclusion of all other business, until the 
bill and pending amendments are finally disposed of. 

And that it was proposed to modify, for the foregoing stated pur- 
pose, the following rules, namely: VII, VIII, IX, X, XII, XIX, XXII, 
XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV and XL. 

Ordered. That the notice, with the proposed orders, be printed. 
[1st sess., 51st Cong., J. of S:, 472, Aug. 18, 1890.] 

Mr. Qua*, pursuant to notice, submitted the following resolution, 
which was ordered to be printed : 

Resolved, That the following orders be adopted for the government 
of the Senate during the present session of Congress : 

Ordered, 1. That during the present session of Congress the Senate 
will not take up for consideration any legislative business other than 
the pending bill (H. R. 9416), conference reports, general appropriation 
hills, pension bills, bills relating to the public lands, to the United 
States courts, to the Postal Service, to agriculture and forestry, to 
public buildings, and Senate or concurrent resolutions. 

Ordered, 2. That the consideration of all bills other than such as are 
mentioned' in the foregoing order is hereby postponed until the session 
of Congress to be held on the first Monday of December, 1890. 

Ordered, 3. That a vote shall be taken on the bill (H. R. 9416) now 
under consideration in the Senate and upon amendments then pending, 
without further debate, on the 30th day of August, 1800, the voting 
to commence at 2 o'clock p. m on said day and to continue on that and 
subsequent days, to the exclusion of all other business, until the bill 
and pending amendments are finally disposed of. 

For the foregoing stated purpose the following rules, namely, VII, 
VIII, IX, X, XII, XIX, XXII, XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL, are 
modified. 

[1st sess. 51st Co>g., J. of S., 476, Aug. 20, 1890.] 

The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the resolution sub- 
mitted by Mr. Quay on the 18th instant, as follows: 

Resolved, That the following orders be adopted for the government 
of the Senate during the present term of Congress : 

Ordered, 1. That during the present session of Congress the Senate 
will not take up for consideration any legislative business other than 
the pending bill (II. R. 9416), conference reports, general appropria- 
tion bills, pension bills, bills relating to public lands, United States 
courts, the Postal Service, to agriculture and forestry, to public build- 
ings, and Senate or concurrent resolutions. 

Ordered, 2. That 'the consideration of all bills other than such as 
are mentioned in the foregoing order is hereby postponed until the 
session of Congress to be held on the first Monday of December, 1890. 

Ordered, S. That a vote shall be taken on the bill (H. R. 9416) now 
under consideration in the Senate and upon amendments then pending, 
without further debate, on the 30th day of August. 1890, the voting 
to commence at 2 o'clock p. m. ou said day and to continue on that and 
subsequent days, to the exclusion of all other business, until the bill 
and pending amendments are finally disposed of. 

For the foregoing stated purpose the following rules, namely, VII, 
VIII, IX, X, XII, XIX, XXII, XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL, are 
modified. 

The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution ; and an amendment 
having been proposed by Senator Hoar, viz : Strike out all after the 
word " resolved " and in lieu thereof insert " that the rules of the 
Senate be amended by adding the following : 

" When any bill or resolution shall have been under consideration 
for a reasonable time it shall be in order for any Senator to demand 
that debate thereon be closed. If such demand be seconded by a 
majority of the Senators present, the question shall forthwith he 
taken thereon without further debate, and the pending measures shall 
take precedence of all other business whatever. If the Senate shall 
decide to close debate, the question shall be put upon the pending 
amendments, upon amendments of which notice will then be given, and 
81722—14548 2 



18 

upon the measure in its successive stages, according to the rules of 
the Senate, but without further debate, except that evcrv Senator who 
may desire shall he permitted to speak upon a measure not more than 
once and rot exceeding one hour. [ 

"After such demand snail have been made bv any Senator no other 
motion snail be in order until the same shall have been voted upon by 
the Senate, unless the snme shall fail to be seconded. 

"After the Senate shall have decided to close debate, no motion shall 
be in order but a 'motion to adjourn or to take recess, when such motion 
shall be seconded by a majority of the Senate. When either of said 
motions shall have been lost or shall have failed of a second, it shall 
not be in order to renew the same until one Senator shall have spoken 
upon the pending measure or one vote upon the same shall have inter- 
vened. 

" For the foregoing stated purpose the following rules, namelv, VII, 
VIII. IX, X, XII, XIX, XXII, XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL are 
modified." 

On motion by Mr. Hoar to amend the part proposed to he stricken out 
by inserting, after the words "the pending bill (II. It. 941G)," the words 
*• the hill to amend and supplement the election laws of the United 
Stales (II. R. 11045)," and by adding, at the end of the resolutions, the 
words "and immediately thereafter the bill to amend and supplement 
the election laws of the United States shall he taken up for considera- 
tion, and shall remain before the Senate every day for three days, after 
the reading of the Jour. ml. to the exclusion of all other business, and on 
the fourth day of September, at 2 o'clock, voting thereon, and on tho 
then pending amendments, shall begin and shall continue from day to 
day, to the exclusion of other business, until the same arc finally dis- 
posed of." 

After debate, 

On motion by Mr. Spooner, that the resolution, with the proposed 
amendment, he referred to the Committee on Rules, 

Pending debate. 

The President pro tempore announced that the hour of 12 o'clock ha<l 
arrived, and laid before the Senate the unfinished business at its ad- 
journment yesterday, viz, the bill (II. R. !)41G) to reduce the revenue 
and equalize duties on imports, and for other purposes. 

[Congressional Record, 1st sess. 51st Cong., S841-S849.] 

List sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., Sept. 23, 1890.] 

The Senate proceded to consider the resolution submitted by Mr. Quay 
August 18, 1890, prescribing an order of business during the remainder 
of the present session ; and 

Ordered, That it be postponed indefinitely. 

[2d sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 4G, Dec. 23, 1890.] 

Mr. Aldrich gave notice, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 
XL, that he would move certain amendments to the rules, which would 
modify Rules VII, VIII, IX, X, XII, XIX, XXII, XXVII, XXXV, and 
XL, and for that purpose he would hereafter submit the following 
resolution : 

Resolved, That for the remainder of this session the rules of the 
Senate be amended by ading thereto the following : 

" When any bill, resolution, or other question shall have been under 
consideration for a reasonable time it shall be in order for any Senator 
to demand that debate thereon be closed. On such demand no debate 
shall be in order, and pending such demand no other motion, except 
one motion to adjourn, shall be made. If such demand be seconded 
by a majority of the Senators present, the question shall forthwith be 
taken thereon without debate. If the Senate shall decide to close 
debate on the bill, resolution, or other question, the measure shall take 
precedence of all other business whatever, and the question shall bo 
put upon the amendments, if any, then pending, and upon the measure 
in its successive stages, according to the rules of the Senate, but 
without further debate, except that every Senator who may desire 
shall be permitted to speak upon the measure, including all amendments, 
not more than once, and not exceeding 30 minutes. 

"After the Senate shall have decided to close debate as herein pro- 
vide, no motion shall be in order but a motion to adjourn or to take 
a recess, when such motion shall be seconded by a majority of -the 
Senate. When either of said motions shall have been lost, or shall 
have failed of a second, it shall not be in order to renew the same 
until one Senator shall have spoken upon the pending measure, or one 
vote upon the same shall have intervened. 

" Pending proceedings under the foregoing rule no proceeding in 
respect of a quorum shall be in order until it shall have appeared on a 
81722—14543 



U) 

division or on the taking of the yeas and nays that a quorum is not 
prrspnt and voting. 

' " Pending proceedings under 'the foregoing rule, all questions of 
order, whether on appeal or otherwise, shall be decided without debate, 
and no obstructive or dilatory motion or proceeding of any kind shall 
be in order. 

" For the foregoing stated pm-nosrs t^c following rules, namely, VI T, 
VIII. IX. XII, XIX, XXII, XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL, aio 
modified." 

Ordered, That the proposed resolution be printed. 

[2d sess. 51st Con- , J. cf S. f 51, Dec. 29, 1S90.] 

Mr. Aldrich, pursuant to notice given on the 23d instant, submitted 
the following resolution, which was ordered to be printed : 
. Resolved, That for t're remainder of this session the rules of the 
Senate be amended by adding thereto the following : 

" When any bill, resolution or other question shall have been under 
consideration' for a considerable time it shall Le in order for any Sena- 
tor to demand that debate thereon be closed. On such demand no de- 
bate shall be in order, and pending such demand no other motion, except 
one motion to adjourn, shall be made. If s"ch demand be seconded by a 
majority of the Senators present, the question shall forthwith be taken 
thereon without debate. If the Senate shall decide to close debate on 
any bill, resolution, or other question, the measure shall lake precedence 
of all other business whatever, and the question shall be put upon the 
amendments, if any, then pending, and upon the measure in its suc- 
cessive stages, according to the rules of the Senate, but without further 
debate, except that every Senator who may desire shall be permitted to 
speak upon the measure, including all amendments, not more than once, 
and not exceeding 30 minutes. 

".After the Senate shall have decided to close debate as herein pro- 
vided, no motion shall be in order but a moiion to adjourn or to take a 
recess, when such motions shall be seconded by a majority of the Senate. 
When either of said motions shall have been lost or shall have failed of 
a second, it shall net be in order to renew the same until one Senator 
shall have spoken upon the pending measure, or one vote upon the same 
shall have intervene I. 

" Pending proceedings under the foregoing rule, no proceeding in re- 
spect of the quorum shall be in order until it shall have appeared on a 
division, or on the taking of the yeas and nays, that a quorum is not 
present and voting. 

" Pending proceedings under the foregoing rule, all questions of order, 
whether upon appeal or otherwise, shall be decided without debate, and 
no obstructive or dilatory motion or proceedings of any kind shall be in 
order. 

" For the foregoing stated purposes the following rules, namelv, VI T, 
VIII. IX. X, XII, XIX, XXII, XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL, are 
modified." 

[2d sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 87. Jan. 20, 1891.] 

On motion by Mr. Aldrich. that the Senate proceed to the considera- 
tion of the resolution submittted by him December. 29. 1SDO, to amend 
the rules so as !o provide a limitation of debate under certain condi- 
tions, and for that ourposc to modify rules VII. VIII. IX, X. XII, XIX, 
XXII, XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV. and XL. 

It was determined in the affirmative; 

When. 

Mr. Harris raised a question of order, namely, that the notice given by 
Mr. Aldrich was not sufficiently specific to meet the requirements, of 
Rule XL, as it did not specify the parts of the rules proposed to be 
suspended, modified, or amended, and the purposes thereof, and that 
the proposed rule materially modifies Kuies V and XX, and neither of 
these rules are mentioned In the notice as rules proposed to be sus- 
pended, modified, or amended. 

Pending which [the hour of 2 o'clock having arrivrd, pf c ] 

[Coxgressional Record, 2d sess., 51st Cong.,. 15G4-1568.] 

[2d sess. 51st Cong.. J. of S.. 89, Jan. 22, 1891.] • 

On motion by Mr. Aldrich, that the Sena'.e proceed to the considera- 
tion of the resolution submitted by him December -29. 1S90, to amend 
the rules so as to provide a limitation of debate under certain condi- 
tions, and for that purpose to modify Rules VII, VIII, IX, X, XII, XIX, 
XXII, XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL. /- 

Mr.. Harris raised a question of order, namely, that the unfinished 
business was the motion of Mr. Gorman, to correct the Journal -of the' 
81722—14548 /; - 



20 

day before yesterday, it being a question of the highest privilege, and 
under Rule III to be proceeded with until it is concluded. i 

The Vice President overruled the question of order, and stated that 
he did not find any rule bearing upon the question of amending or ap- 
proving any other Journal than that of the preceding day, and is there- 
fore of the opinion that the motion made by the Senator from Rhode 
Island was in order, the morning hour having expired. 

From the decision of the Chair Mr. Harris appealed to the Senate; 
and, 

Qn the question, " Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judg- 
ment of the Senate?" r 

It was determined in the affirmative, {^ays~~^~l~tl™~I~~^~I 30 

On motion bv Mr. Cockrell, 

The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, 

[The names are omitted.] 

So the decision of the Chair was sustained. 

[Congressional Record, 2d sess. 51st Cong., 1654-1G64.] 

[2d sess. 51st Cong., .T. of S., 90, Jan. 22, 1891.] 

The question recurring on the motion of Mr. Aldrich, that the Senate 
proceed to the consideration of the resolution. 

On motion by Mr. Gorman, to lay the motion on the table, 

/Yens HO 

It was determined in the negative, {Nays~~~~~~~1~~ "~""~~ 35 

On motion by Mr. Gorman, 

The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, 

[The names are omitted.] 

So the motion to lay on the table wns not agreed to. 

Mr. Ransom rab-ed a question of order, namely, that the motion to 
take up the resolution was not in order because the Journal of the 20th 
instant as read on the 21st shows that the resolution was taken up on 
the 20th, and if tha + be true, it then became and now is the unfinished 
business. 

The Vice President overruled the question of order. 

Prom the decision of the Chair Mr. Ransom appealed to the Senate ; 
and. 

On the auestion, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment 
of the Senate? 

It was determined in the affirmative, W a ys~~~~~~11~"Z III" 27 

On motion by Mr. Ransom, 

The yeas and nays heing desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, 

Those who voted in the affirmative are, 

[The names are omitted.] 
■ : So the question of order was overruled. 

Mr. Gorman asked that the motion of Mr. Aldrich be put in writing. 

The motion having been reduced to writing, and the question recur- 
ring on agreeing on the same, 

It was determined in the affirmative, {^lysll"" - "" -— -— S6 

On motion by Mr. Aldrich. 

The yeas and nays bein^ desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, 

[The names are omitted. ] 

So the motion was agreed to ; and 

The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution ; and 

The question being on the point of order raided bv Mr. Harris on the 
20th instant, namely, that the notice given by Mr. Aldrich was not 
sufficiently specific to meet the requirements of Rule XL, as it did not 
specify the parts of the rules supposed to be suspended, modified, or 
amended, and the purposes thereof ; and that the proposed rule mate- 
rially modifies Rules V and XX, and neither of these rules is men- 
tioned in the notice as rules proposed to be suspended, modified, or 
amended, 

The Vice President overruled the question of order, and decided that 
it was not well taken, as in the opinion of the Chair the purpose and 
spirit of the rule are stated in the resolution submitted by Mr. Aldrich. 

Prom the decision of the Chair Mr. Faulkner appealed to the Senate, 
and 

After debate, 

At 2 o'clock and 35 minutes p. m., Mr. Gorman raised a question as 
to the presence of a quorum ; 

Whereupon, 

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Manson In the chair) directed the roll to 
be called. 

81722—14548 



21 

When 

Fifty-one Senators answered to their names. 

A quorum being present, and the question recurring upon the appeal 
taken by Mr. Faulkner from tbe decision of the Chair, 
After further debate. 

On motion by Mr. Aldrich that the appeal lie on the table, 
Mr. Gorman asked that the motion be put in writing ; and 
The motion having been reduced to writing by Mr. Aldrich, 
On the question to agree to the same. 

i \ r p x i ^ 33 

It was determined in the affirmative, W a 'ys ~ " '" _I 23 

On motion by Mr. Gorman, 

The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present, 

[The names are omitted.} 

So the motion was not agreed to. 

The question recurring on agreeing to the resolution submitted by 
Mr. Aldrich, 

Tending debate. 

(Congressional Recobd, 2d sess. 51st Cong., 1664-1682.) 
[2d sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 91, Jan. 22, 1891.} 
. The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution submitted 
by Mr. Aldrich to amend the rules so as to provide a limitation of 
debate. 

An amendment having been proposed by Mr. Stewart, 

On motion by Mr. Faulkner, the yeas and nays were ordered. 

rending debate. 

On motion by Mr. Aldrish, at 5 o'clock and 15 minutes p. m., 

The Senate took a recess until 12 m., Monday. 

Monday, 12 o'clock m. 

The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution submitted by 
Mr. Aldrich to amend the rules so as to provide a limitation of debate; 
and 

The question being on the amendment proposed by Mr. Stewart, 

[Congbessional Recoed, 2d sess., 51st Cong., 1682-1738.] 
[2d sess. 51st Cong,, J. of S.. 91, Jan. 22, 1891. J 

The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion submitted by Mr. 
Gorman to amend the Journal of the proceedings of Tuesday, the 20th 
instant, by striking out, after the motion submitted by Mr. Aldrich that 
the Senate resume the consideration of the resolution to amend the rules 
so as to m'ovide a limitation of debate, the words " It was determined 
in the affirmative " ; when. 

By unanimous consent, the order for the yeas and nays was with- 
drawn ; and. 

The motion to amend having been agreed to, 

The Journal was approved. 

The Senate resumed the consideration of the question of the approval 
of the .Tournal of the proceedings of Wednesday, the 21st instant; and 

The Journal was approved. 

[2d sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 178, Feb. 26, 1891.] 

On motion by Mr. Allison, 

The Senate lesumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration 
of the bill (II. R. 13462) making appropriations for sundry civil ex- 
penses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1892, and 
for other purposes ; 

When, 

On motion by Mr. Allison and by unanimous consent, 

Ordered, That during the consideration of the pending bill debate on 
amendments thereto shall be limited to five minutes for ea2h Senator on 
the pending question, and that no Senator shall speak more than once 
on the same amendment. 

Mr. OWEN. Now, Mr. President, that record which I have 
submitted without reading comes down to 1S91, when Mr, 
Aldrich proposed a cloture rule for the limitation of debate. 
I want to call attention to several other propositions which have 
been made since that time, one by the Senator from New Hamp- 
shire [Mr. Gallinger], now representing the State of New 
Hampshire in this body, on October 34, 3S93, found on page 2504 
of the Congressional Record, Fifty-third Congress, first session, 
as follows : • 

When any bill or resolution reported from a standing or select com- 
mittee is under consideration, if a majority of the entire membership 
81722—14548 



22 

of the Senate submit a request in writing, through the Chair, fhnt 
debate close, such papers shall be referred to the Committee on Rules, 
and it shall be the duty of said committee within a period not exceed- 
in? five- days from the date of said, reference to report an order naming 
a day and hour when a vote shall be taken, and action upon said report 
shall be had without amendment or debate. 

Sena for Gallingeb was very much in favor of a cloture in 
those clays. 

Senator Hoar also proposed a resolution on cloture. Nor were 
they- alone in that respect as distinguished leaders of the opposi- 
tion, but Senator Lodge also proposed the following rule in order 
•to prevent the abuse of the floor of the Senate: 

-And it shall not be in order at any time for any Senator to read a 
speech, either written or printed. 

Senator Vest, of Missouri, in jS03 introduced the following 
resolution, the most moderate form of terminating so-called. de- 
bate (Congressional Record, p. 45, Dec. 5, 1S94) : 

Amendment intended to be proposed to the rules cf the Senate, 
namely,- add to Rule I the following section: 

" Skc. 2. Whenever any bill, motion, or resolution is pending before 
the Senate as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated 
en divers days, amounting in all to 30, it shall be in order for any 
Senator to move that a time be fixed for the taking of a vote upon such 
bill, motion, or resolution, and such motion shall not be amendable or 
debatable, but shall be immediately put; and if adopted by a majority 
vote of all the Members of the Senate, the vote upon such bill, motion, 
oi- resolution, with all the amendments thereto which may have been 
proposed at the time of such motion, shall be had at the date fixed in 
such, original motion without further debate or amendment, except by 
unanimous consent, and during the pendency of such motion to fix a 
date, and also at the time fixed by the Senate for voting upon such bill, 
motion, or resolution no other business of any kind or character shall 
be entertained, except by unanimous consent, until such motion, bill, or 
resolution shall have been finally acted upon." 

Hon. Orville H. Piatt, on September 21, 1S93, introduced the 
following resolution (p. 1038) : 

Whenever any bill or resolution is pending before the Senate as un- 
finished business the presiding officer shall, upon the written request 
of "a majority of the Senators, fix a day and hour, and notify the Sen- 
ate thereof, when general debate shall cease thereon," which time shall 
not be less than five days from the submission of such request, and he 
shall also fix a subsequent day and hour, and notify the Senate thereof, 
when the vote, shall be taken on the bill or resolution and any amend- 
ment thereto without further debate, the time for taking the vote to 
be not more than two days later than the time when general debate is 
to cease, and in the interval between the closing of general debate and 
the taking cf the vote no Senator shall speak more than five minutes 
nor more than once upon the same proposition. 

And, among other things, said : 

The rules of the Senate, as of every legislative body, ought to facili- 
tate the transaction of business. I think that proposition will not be 
denied. The rules of the Senate as they stand to-diy make it im- 
possible, or nearly impossible, to transact business. I think that propo- 
sition will not be denied. We as a Senate are fast losing the respect 
of the people of the United States. We are fast bein-; considered a body 
that exists for the purpose of retarding and obstructing legislation. We 
are bein? compared in the minds of the people of this country to the 
House of Lords in England, and the reason for it is that under our 
rules it is impossible or nearly impossible to obtain action when there 
is any considerable opposition to a bill here. 

I think that I may safely say that there is a large majority upon this 
side of the Senate who would favor the adoption of such a rule at the 
present time. 

. Mr. Roar, of Massachusetts (1S93). submitted to the commit- 
tee a proposed substitute, as follows (p. 1G37) : 

Resolved, That the rules of the Senate be amended by adding the 
following : 

" When any bill or resolution shall have been under consideration 
for more than one day it shall be In order for any Senator to demand 
81722—14548 



that debate thereon be closed. If sach demand be seconded by a 
majority of the Senators present, the question shall forthwith be taken 
thereon without further debate, and the pending measure shall take 
precedence of all other business whatever. If the Senate shall decide to 
close debate, the question sha!) be put upon the pending amendments, 
upon amendments of which notice shall then be given, and upon the 
measure in its successive stages according to the rules of the Senate, 
but without further debate, except that every Senator who may desire 
shall be permitted to speak upon the measure not more than once and 
not exceeding one hour. 

"After such demand shall have been made by any Senator no other 
motic.n shall be in order until t'ne same shall have been voted upon by 
the Senate, unless the same shall fail to be seconded. 

"After the Senate shall have decided to close debate no motion shall 
be in order, but a motion to adjourn or to take a recess, when such 
motion shall be seconded by a majority of the Senate. When either of 
said motions shall have been lost or shall have failed of a second it 
shall not be in order to renew the same until one Senator shall have 
spoken upon the pending measure or one vote upon the same shall have 
intervened. 

" For the foregoing stated purnose the following rules, namely, VII, 
VIII. IX, X, XII, XIX, XXII. XXVII, XXVIII, XXXV, and XL, are 
modified." 

Mr. Lodge, of Massachusetts, also then, as now, Senator of 
the United States from Massachusetts, supported this proposal, 
using the following language (p. 1637) : 

„ It is because I believe that the moment for action has arrived that 
I desire now simply to say a word expressive of my very strong belief 
in the principle of the resolution offered by the Senator from Connecti- 
cut, Mr. I'latt. 

We govern in this country in our representative bodies by voting and 
debate. It is most desirable to have them both. Both are of great im- 
portance. But if we are to have only one, then the one which leads to 
action is the more important. To vote without debating may be hasty, 
may be ill considered, may be rash, but to debate and never vote is 
imbecility. 

I am well aware that there are measures now pending, measures 
with reference to the tariff, which I consider more injurious to the 
country than the financial measure now before us. I am aware that 
there is a measure which has been rushed into the House of Representa- 
tives at the very moment when they are calling on us Republicans for 
nonpartisanship which is partisan in the highest degree and which in- 
volves evils which I regard as infinitely worse than anything that can 
arise from any economic measure, because it is a blow at human rights 
and personal liberty. I know that those measures are at hand. I know 
that such a rule as is now proposed will enable a majority surely to 
put them through this body after due debate and will lodge in the hands 
of a majority the power and the high responsibility which I believe the 
majority ought always to have. But. Mr. President, I do not shrink 
from the conclusion in the least. If it is right now to take a step like 
this, as I believe it is. in order to pass a measure which the whole 
country is demanding, then, as it seems to me, it is right to pass it for 
all measures. If it is not right for this measure, then^it is net right to 
pass it for any other. 

I believe that the most important principle in our Government is that 
the majority should rule. It is for that reason that I have done what 
lay in my power to promote what 1 thought was for the protection of 
elections, because I think the majority should rule at the ballot box. I 
think equally that the majority should rule on this floor — not by violent 
methods, hut by proper dignified rules, such as are proposed by my 
colleague and by the Senator from Connecticut. The country demands 
action and we give them words. For these reasons, Mr. President. I 
have ventured to detain I he Senate in order to express my most cordial 
approbation of the principle involved to the proposed rules which have 
just been leferred to the committee. 

Senator David B. Hill, of New York (1893), proposed the fol- 
lowing amendment (p. 1639) : 

Add to Rule IX the following section: 

" Sec. 2. Whenever any bill or resolution is pending before the Sen- 
ate as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated on 
divers days amounting in all to 30 days, it shall be in order for any 
Senator to move to fix a date for the taking of a vote upon such bill or 
81722—14548 



24 

resolution, and such motion shall not be amended or debatable ; and If 
passed bv a majority of all the Senators elected the vote upon such bill 
or resolution, with all the amendments thereto which may be pending 
at the time of such motion, shall be immediately had without further 
debate or amendment, except by unanimous consent." 

Only last Congress, April 6, 1911, the distinguished Senator 
from New York, Mr. Root, introduced the following resolution : 

Resolved,, That the Committee en RuTes be, and it is hereby, instructed 
to report for the consideration of the Senate a rule or rules to secure 
more effective control by the Senate over its procedure, and especially 
over its procedure upon conference reports and upon bills which have 
been passed by the House ana have been favorably reported in the Sen- 
ate. (Congressional Record, vol. 47, pt. 1, p. 107.) 

And Senator Lodge argued very strongly in favor of a cloture. 

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield to the Senator from Colorado? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Colorado. 

Mr. THOMAS. If the Senator will turn to pages 1637 and 
1638 of the same volume that he holds in his hands, he will 
find, if my memory serves me right, a resolution upon the sub- 
ject offered by Mr. Lodge, or else a speech in favor of a reso- 
lution previously offered by Senator Piatt — a speech which 
contains a great deal of matter which is pertinent to the present 
situation. 

Mr. OWEN. Senator Piatt, on the 20th of September, 1893, 
proposed the following resolution : 

Resolved, That Rule IX of the Senate be amended by adding the. 
following' section : 

Sec. 2. Whenever any bill or resolution is pending before the Senate 
as unfinished business the Presiding Officer shall, upon the written re- 
quest of a majority of the Senators, fix a day and hour and notify 
the Senate thereof when general debate shall cease thereon, which time 
shall not he less than five days from the submission request, and he 
shall also fix a subsequent day and hour, and notify the Senate thereof, 
when the vote shall be taken on the bill or resolution and any amend- 
ment thereto without further debate ; the time for taking the vote to 
be not more than two days later than the time when general debate is. 
to cease, and in the interval between the closing of general debate and 
the taking of the vote no Senator shall speak more than five minutes 
or more than once upon the same proposition. 

Senator Piatt argued strongly for this; nor was he alone. 
Senator Lodge, on page 2536, made an argument iu favor of 
cloture, to this effect : 

I believe, of course, that the proper way is to go straight at it and 
to put in the hands of the majority of the Senate the power to close 
debate and the power to take a vote after due debate. 

But as it appears that there is not a majority in the Senate for 
closure, as no action has been taken by the Committee on Rules in 
that direction, and as there appears to be a prejudice against any. 
method of bringing the Senate to a vote because it is in conflict with 
Senate traditions, I have ventured to offer two amendments which I 
think will at least tend to prevent obstruction, although they are not as 
thorough and complete as they ought to be. 

This question of obstruction has culminated in the great representa- 
tive bodies of the Engiish-speaking people within the last few years. 
It has been met and disposed of in the House of Commons by the 
closure rules, which recently have been applied in practice at every 
stage of the home-rule bill. It has been met and disposed of in the 
House of Representatives. Those two great representative bodies of 
the Engiish-speaking people, owing to reforms which have been car- 
ried out within the last half dozen years, are able to-day to transact 
business, to transact it according to the will of the majority, and 
thereby to place upon the majority the public responsibility which they 
ought to bear. 

81722—14548 



25 

And more to like effect from the distinguished Senator from 
Massachusetts. 

The Senator from Massachusetts was not content with ex- 
pressing himself in that respect in the United States Senate, 
but he wrote a very interesting article for the North American 
Review, in the issue of November, 1893, page 523, in which 
he sets up with great force the importance of allowing a ma- 
jority to rule, in which he advocates the Reed rules in the 
House of Representatives, which since that time have been, 
wisely enough, adopted by every succeeding Congress, whether 
Democratic or Republican, because the common sense of a 
parliament requires that the majority shall not be throttled 
by the minority, for the simple reason the majority must be 
permitted to exercise the functions for which they are chosen 
by the American people, if representative government is to 
stand. I shall ask to put this short article by Mr. Lodge as an 
addendum to my remarks, if there is no objection. It is a 
very short one. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair hears no objection. 

Mr. OWEN. Mr. Lodge, after arguing strenuously for the 
cloture 

Mr. GALLINGER. Will the Senator give the date of that 
article? 

Mr. OWEN. November, 1893. 

After arguing strenuously for the cloture, Mr. Lodge points 
out the practice of the previous question, and says : 

But the essence of a system of courtesy is that it should be tho 
same at all points. The two great rights in our representative bodies 
are voting and debate. If the courtesy of unlimited debate is granted, 
it must carry with it the reciprocal courtesy of permitting a vote after* 
due discussion. If this is not the case, the system is impossible. Of 
the two rights, moreover, that of voting is the higher and more im- 
portant. We ought to have both, and debate certainly in ample meas- 
ure : but if we are forced to choose between them, the right of action 
must prevail over the right of discussion. To vote toithout debating 
is perilous, but to debate and never vote is imbecile. 

I commend the language of the Senator from Massachusetts 
to the Senator from New Hampshire. 

Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield to the Senator from New Hampshire? ; 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from New Hampshire. . 

Mr. GALLINGER. The Senator has quoted an amendment 
to the rules which I wrote shortly after coming into this body, 
which was sent to the Committee on Rules and never came out 
of that committee. I did hold to that view at that time; but 
I listened to a wonderful speech from Senator Turpie, of Indi- 
ana, about that time in opposition to cloture, which did very 
much toward converting me to the opposite view. 

The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Lodge] came into the 
Senate fresh from the House in 1893, imbued with the idea 
that the Reed rules were the acme of perfection, and he advo- 
cated that practice. It was during a famous debate on tho 
repeal of the silver-purchase clause in the law that was then : 
on the statute books, and our Democratic friends were filibus- 
tering against it with great earnestness and with a good deal of 
success. 

81722—14548 



26 

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield to the Senator from Colorado? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Colorado. 

Mr. THOMAS. I simply wish to remind the Senator from 
New Hampshire that that filibuster was not a party filibuster. 
There were a great many Senators upon the Republican side 
engaged in it. One was from my State, who afterwards took 
his seat upon this side. It was not a Democratic filibuster. 

Mr. GALLINGER. There were four or five so-called Repub- 
licans at that time 

Mr. THOMAS. Oh, there were more than that, Mr. rresi- 
dent and there was nothing "so called" about them. They 
were Republicans. 

Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for 1 
permitting me the opportunity of saying that when I first came 
here I did entertain the view the Senator has attributed to. 
me; but I listened very attentively to the views of Senators, 
many of whom had been here a Jong time, and I found that they 
were almost unanimously against that procedure. They assured 
me that no harm had ever come from it, and I changed my 
views, and I have entertained those changed views from that 
day to the present time. 

Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, against the views of Mr. Turpie, 
the Senator referred to by the Senator from New Hampshire, 
I wish to quote the language of another distinguished Senator 
of that date on the Democratic side — Senator White, now the 
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He 
said, on October 13. 1S03 (Congressional Record, p. 2477), 
in commenting on the filibuster of that date: 

Sir, we have for days and days in this great body, upon which the 
eyes of the whole world have been turned in the past as the most 
ox.-'!ted and the most dignified and the most responsible legislative 
body on the face of God's earth, witnessed scenes in it which, in my 
judgment, have *nade it an object of contempt to every civilized man 
and to every honest judgment. So far as I am concerned, I hope that 
this action to-nigbt will initiate the first step to reach a point in 
which this great tody, gathering its self-respect ahout it. will so deport 
itself as to save at least some of the honor and some of the character 
which has been its ornament for so many years. While it is sought to 
drag it down in the mire and dust. I hope it will so deport itself as to 
vindicate its duty. If gentlemen sit in this room and call attention to 
the absence of a quorum, and then remain silent on the roll called 
to ascertain whether there is a quorum, I hope there will be firmness 
and manhood here to visit that punishment which, in my judgment, 
such conduct deserves. If it be done. then, sir, those who use such 
methods will seek some other field for their display fhan this. If it be 
not done, the self-respect of this body is, in my judgment, gone. 

Senator David B. Hill likewise objected very strongly to the 
abuse of the time of the Senate by the filibuster, and he, was 
not alone in that. I call attention to the proposal of Senator 
Hill in 1893. page 1G39: 

Add to Rule IX the following section : 

*' Sec. 2. Whenever any bill or resolution is pending before the Sen- 
nte as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated on 
divers days amounting in all to 30 days, it shall be in order for any 
Senator to move to. fix a date for the taking of a vote upon such bill or 
resolution, and such motion shall not be amended or debatable: and if 
passed by a majority of all the Senators elected the vote upon such bill 
Or resolution, with all the amendments thereto which may be pending 
nt the time of such motion, shall be immediately had without further 
debate or amendment, except by unanimous consent." 
81722—14548 



27 

Nor does this by any means end the matter on the two sides 
of the Chamber. There are many distinguished Senators who, 
in the course of the debates on these questions, expressed simi- 
lar sentiments. I shall not encumber the Record with making 
quotations from them, except to show that the leaders on both 
sides of this Chamber, as the exigencies seemed to require, have 
not hesitated to urge amendment of the rules to provide for a 
previous question after reasonable debate has been had. 

Mr. WEEKS. Mr. President 

Tho PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield to the Senator from Massachusetts? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Massachusetts. 

Mr. WEEKS. I wish to ask the Senator if any Senator has 
ever made that contention when he was in the minority party 
of the Senate? Has it not always been when he was in the 
majority? 

Mr. OWEN. Oh, I think so, very generally. That does not 
change the force of the opinions and arguments cited, however. 
If you gentlemen, through your leadership on that side, declare 
vehemently in favor of the virtue of a cloture when you are in 
the majority, and if the gentlemen on this side declare 
vigorously in favor of a cloture when they are in the 
majority, does it not argue that both sides have committed them- 
selves earnestly to the reasonable, common-sense rule that the 
majority shall command this Chamber? And if both sides have 
committed themselves, with what face will you deny the reason 
of the rule which you have yourselves advocated with such force 
and with such earnestness? Do you wish to argue that both 
sides were fraudulently making the argument and that neither 
side is entitled to the respect of honest men, and that their 
opinions are worthless because merely indicating a desire for 
partisan advantage? 

If this be true, let us follow the rule of all other great par- 
liamentary bodies — of Great Britain, of France, of Germany, of 
Austria, of Italy, of Switzerland, of Hungary, of Spain, of Den- 
mark — of the great States of our own Union, who do not permit 
filibuster or the rule of the minority over the majority. 

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. President 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield to the Senator from Florida? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Florida. 

Mi\ FLETCHER. May I ask the Senator if lie does not think 
that \.hen the rule was originally adopted providing that a 
Senator could speak once in one day upon a question in debate, it 
was contemplated that the speech would be confined to the ques- 
tion pending and then before the Senate? 

Mr. OWEN. Oh, absolutely. No one imagined in the early 
days of the Senate that the minority would have the shameless 
impudence to try to rule the majority. 

Mr. FLETCHER. And does not the Senator think this 
abuse has grown up not because the rule ever contemplated 
euch abuse, but rather in spite of it, and that the abuse consists 
largely in the fact that nowadays the so-called debate or dis- 
cussion or speech is not confined at all to the question before 
the Senate, but all latitude is given for the discussion of any 
old subject at any old time, whether it is really before the 
Senate or not? Does not the Senator think that is really the 
81722—14548 



28 

abuse, and that that was never contemplated by the Senate 
when the rules were originally adopted? 

Mr. OWEN. That is quite true. When the rules of the 
Senate were adopted in 1789 they had the " previous question** 
coming from the Continental Congress, which had the previous 
question coming from the Parliament of Great Britain, which 
had the previous question in 1690. The Senate maintained the 
previous question for 17 years. It was then a small body of 
very courteous men, only 34 in number, and they dropped the 
previous question as not needed in so small a body of such 
very courteous men. They had only used it three times in 17 
years, and as a matter of courtesy they merely omitted the 
previous question from the printed rules. It still was permis- 
sible under the general parliamentary law. They never imag- 
ined the Senator from Ohio speaking for 9 hours, the Senator 
from California speaking for long hours on the shipping bill, 
but confining his rambling observations to a dissertation on 
Christian science, followed by the Senator from Utah by a 
13-hour speech, and speech after speech consuming days for the 
shameless purpose of killing time and killing majority rule and 
defeating popular government. 

Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, will the Senator permit 
me to interrupt him further? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from New Hampshire. 

Mr. GALLINGER. I will suggest to the Senator from 
Florida that if he should enforce that rule it would prevent 
the Senator from Oklahoma from .making his very interesting 
discussion to-day. 

Mr. OWEN. Oh, that may be true, Mr. President. I agree 
with the Senator from New Hampshire that a speech on the 
cloture would not be very much in point on the pending ques- 
tion of the shipping bill, but 

Mr. FLETCHER. But that is the pending question. 

Mr. OWEN. Yes ; it is so far in point that the Senator from 
Missouri [Mr. Reed] has moved a temporary, particular, and 
special cloture for the purpose of bringing to a conclusion the 
endless filibuster on that side of the Chamber and getting a 
vote on the shipping bill. I am not far afield in discussing 
cloture in this way, for cloture is needed to get the vote on 
the shipping bill. 

Mr. FLETCHER. That is the precise question. 

Mr. OWEN. I think I am really much more in point than the 
Senator from New Hampshire would indicate. 

Mr. President, I wish to submit for the Recokd the practice 
of every State in the Union. I have in my hand a compilation 
of the rules on the ''previous question." of the various States 
comprising this Republic, and I submit them to show that the 
common sense of the people of this Republic, the common sense 
moving the legislatures of the various States, has spoken in 
regard to this matter; and only when they have had no trouble 
from an unfair filibuster is there the absence of a rule of clo- 
ture; that is, where the rule of courtesy carries with it the 
reciprocal courtesy of permitting the majority to vote after 
reasonable debate has been had. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the inser- 
tion of the statement in the Record? 
81722—14548 



29 

Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, before agreeing to the in- 
sertion I will ask tlie Senator, with his permission, if he has 
given the rules of the State senates as well as the houses of 
representatives? 

Mr. OWEN. Yes; both are given — both the senate and house, 
wherever it occurs. I had it compiled by the legislative refer- 
ence division of the Library of Congress for the use of the 
Senate. 

Mr. GALLINGER. I will say to the Senator that I chance to 
know that we have not a previous question in the State Senate 
of New Hampshire. 

Mr. OWEN. In the State Senate of New Hampshire, I take it, 
the Senator will not allege that any filibusters have been carried 
on so as to defeat the will of the majority. If so, I shall be glad 
to have the Senator say that that is a fact. 

Mr. GALLINGER. I think probably the Senator is correct. 
We do not have before the Legislature of New Hampshire the 
great questions that we have before this body. 

Mr. 'OWEN. And therefore there is no need for the rule of 
cloture, because your senate does not violate the courtesy of 
freedom of debate by a filibuster 

Miv GALLINGER. I do not know that there has been any 
prolonged filibuster, but I do know that unlimited debate is 
allowed under the rules. That is all I know about it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the in- 
sertion in the Record of the matter referred to by the Senator 
from Oklahoma? The Chair bears none, and it is so ordered. 

The matter referred to is as follows: 

Previous Question in State Legislatures. 

ALABAMA. 

Senate. 
No rule. 

House. 

20. The previous question shall be in the following form • " Shall the 
main question be now put?" If demanded by a vote of a majority of 
the members present, its effect shall be to cut off all debate and bring 
the house to a direct vote ; first, upon the pending amendments, if there 
are any in their order, and then on the main question, but the mover 
of the nuestion or the chairman of the committee having charge of the 
bill or resolution shall have the right to close the debate after the call 
Of the previous question has been sustained for not more than 15 
minutes. (House rules, 1915, p. 8.) 

ARIZONA. 

Senate. 

32. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which being 
ordered by a majority of senators voting, if a quorum be present, shall 
have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote 
upon the immediate question or questions on which it has been asked 
and ordered. The previous question may be asked and ordered upon a 
single motion, a series of motions allowable under the rules, or an 
amendment or amendments, or may be made to embrace all authorized 
motions or amendments and include the bill to its passage or rejection. 
It shall be in order, pending the motion for, or after the previous question 
shall have been ordered on its passage, for the president to entertain 
and submit a motion to commit, with ,or without instructions, to a 
standing or select committee. (Senate journal, 1012, p. 75.) 

House. 

Information not available. 

ARKANSAS. 

Senate. 
19. The previous question shall not be moved by less than three 
members, and shall he stated in these words, to wit : "Shall the main 
81722—14548 



30 

question be now put?" If the previous question is lost, the main ques- 
tion shall not thereby be postponed, but the senate shall proceed with' 
the consideration of the same. If the previous question is carried, the 
original mover of the main question, or if the bill or resolution origi- 
nated in the other house, then the chairman of the committee reporting 
the same shall have the right to close the debate and be limited to 30 
minutes ; and should the previous question be ordered on a subject de- 
batable, before the same has been debated, the friends and the oppo- 
nents of the measure shall have 30 minutes on either side in which to 
debate the question if desired. (Senate journal, 1901, p. 33.) 

House. 

53. When any debatable question is before the house any member 
may move the previous question, but it shall be seconded by at least five 
members whether that question (called the main question) shall now be 
put. If it passes in the affirmative, then the main question is to be 
put immediately, and no member shall debate it further, either to add to 
or alter : Provided further, When the previous question shall have 
been adopted the mover of the main question or chairman of the com- 
mittee shall have the privilege of closing the debate and be limited to 
one-half hour: Provided further, When the previous question has 
been ordered on a debatable proposition which has not been debated 15 
minutes in the aggregate shall be allowed the friends and opponents of 
the proposition each before putting the main question. (House journal, 
1013, p. 28.) 

CALIFORNIA. 

Senate. 

57. The previous question shall be put in the following form : " Shall 
the question be now put?" It shall only be admitted when demanded 
by a majority of the senators present upon a division : and its effect 
shall be to put an end to all debate, except that the author of the bill 
or the amendment shall have the right to close, and the subject under 
discussion shall thereupon be immediately put to a vote. On a motion 
for the previous question prior to a vote being taken by the senate, a 
call of the senate shall be in order. (List of members and rules, 1013, 
p. 59.) 

Assembly. 

45. The previous question shall be in this form: "Shall the main 
question he now put?" And its effect, when sustained by a majority 
of the members present, shall be to put an end to all debate and bring 
the House to a vote on the question or questions before it. (List of 
members and rules, 1013, p. 110.) 

COLORADO. 

Senate. 

X, 2. Debate may be closed at any time not less than one hour from 
the adoption of a motion to that effect, and upon a three-fifths vote of 
the memhers elect an hour may be fixed for a vote upon the pending 
measure. On either of these motions cot more than 10 minutes shall 
be allowed for debate, and no senator shall speak more than 3 minutes; 
and no other motion shall be entertained until the motion to close de- 
bate or to fix an hour for the vote on the pending question shall have 
been determined. (Senate Journal, 1007, p. 101.) 

House. 

XXVI, 1. When there shall be a motion for the previous question, 
which, being ordered by a majority of members present, if a quorum, 
it shall have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the house to a 
direct vote upon the immediate question or questions on which it has 
been asked or ordered. The previous question may be asked and ordered 
upon a single motion, a series of motions, allowable under the rules, or 
an amendment or amendments, or may he made to embrace all author- 
ized motions and amendments, and a motion to lay upon the table shall 
he in order on the second or third reading of the bill. 

2. A call of the house shall not be in order after the previous ques- 
tion is ordered unless it shall appear upon the actual count by the 
speaker that a quorum is not present. 

3. All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made 
for the previous question, and pending such motion, shall be decided, 
whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. (House Journal, 1007. 
p. 215.) 

_ 81722—14548 , 



31 

CONNECTICUT. 

Senate. 
In tlio senate of 1011 the previous question was called for. and the 
point was raised that the previous question does not prevail in tho 
senate; the president pro tempore (I'eck) ruled the point well taken. 
(S. J., 1911, p. 555; register and manual, 1014, p. 133.) 

House. 
33. When a question is under debate no motion shall he received 
except — 

1. To adjourn. 

2. To lay on the table. 

3. For the previous question. 

4. To postpone indefinitely. 

5. To cose the debate at a specified time. 
G. To postpone to a time certain. 

7. To commit or recommit. 

8. To amend. 

0. To continue to the next general assembly. 

Which several motions shall have precedence in the order in which 
they stand arranged in this rule, and no motion to lay on the table, 
commit, or recommit, to continue to next general assembly, or to post- 
pone indefinitely, having teen ence decided, shall be again allowed 
at the sam? sitting and at the same stage of the bill or subject 
matter. (Register and manual, 1014, p. 113.) 

DELAWARE. 

Senate. 

5. All motions shall be subject to debate, except motions to adjourn, 
to lay on the tabic, and for the previous question. 

25. When a question is under debate no motion shall be received but 
to adjourn, to lay on the table, for the previous question, to postpone 
to a certain day', to commit, to amend, and to postpone indefinitely, 
which several motions shall have precedence in the order in which 
they are arranged. (Senate rules, 1015, pp. 30, 34.) 

House. 

35. A motion for the previous question shall not be entertained, ex- 
cept at the request of five members rising for that purpose, and shall 
be determined without debate; but when the previous question has 
been called and sustained it shall not cut off any pending amendment. 
The vote shall be taken, without debate, first on the amendments in 
their order and then on the main question. (House rules, 1015, pp. 
43-44.) 

FLORIDA. 

Senate. 
No rule. 

House. 

12. He shall put the previous question in the following form : " Shall 
the main question he cow put?" And all debate on the main question 
and pending amendments shall be suspended, except that the introducer 
of a bill, resolution, or motion shall, if he so desire, be allowed tive 
minutes to discuss the same, or he may divide his time with or may 
waive his right in favor of some other one member before the previous 
question is crdeied. After the adoption of the previous question the 
sense of the house of representatives shall forthwith be taken on 
pending amendments in their regular order and then put upon the 
main question. 

13. On the previous question there shall be no debate. (House 
journal, 1011, p. 250.) 

GEORGIA. 

Senate. 

50. The motion for the previous question shall be decided without 
debate and shall take precedence of all other motions except motions 
"to adjourn " or " to lay on the table," and when.it is moved, the first 
question shall be, " Shall the call for the previous question be sus- 
tained?" If this be decided Dy a majority vote in the affirmative, the 
motion " to adjourn " or " to lay on the table " can still be made, but 
they must be mode before the next question, to wit, "Shall the main 
question be now put?" is decided in the affirmative; and after said last 
question is affirmatively decided by a majority vote said motions will 
be out of order, and the Senate can not adjourn until the previous 
question is exhausted or the regular hour of adjournment arrives. 

51. When the previous question has been ordered, the Senate shall 
then proceed to act on the main question without debate, except that 

81722—14548 



32 

before the main question is put 20 minutes shall be allowed to the 
committee whose report of the bill or other measure is under considera- 
tion to close debate. When the report of the committee is adverse to 
the passage of the bill or other measure, the introduces of the bill shall 
be allowed 20 minutes before the time allowed to the committee for 
closing the debate. The chairman of the committee, or the introducer 
of the bill or other measure, may yield the floor to such senators as 
he may indicate for the time, or anv part of it, allowed under this rule. 

52 After the main question is ordered any senator may call for a 
division of the senate in taking the vote, or may call for the yeas and 
nays ; but on all questions on which the yeas and nays are called the 
assent of one-fifth of the number present shall be necessary to sustain 
the call, and when such call is sustained, the yeas and nays shall be 
entered on the journal. . 

53. The effect of the order that the " mam question be now put is 
to bring the senate to a vote on pending questions in the order in which 
thev stood before it was moved. 

54 After the main question has been ordered no motion to reconsider 
shall be in order until after the vote on the main question is taken and 
announced. . . . 

55. In all cases of contested election, where there is a maionty and a 
minority report from the committee on privileges and elections, if the 
previous question is ordered, there shall be 20 minutes allowed to the 
member of said committee whose name is first signed to said minority 
report, or to such member or members as he may indicate, for the 
time so allowed, or anv part of it, before the 20 minutes allowed to 
the chairman submitting the majority report. 

56. The previous question may be called and ordered upon a single 
moton or an amendment, or it may be made to embrace all authorized 
motions or amendments and include the entire bill to its passage or 
rejection. 

57. A call of the senate shall not be in order after the previous 
question is ordered, unless it shall appear upon an actual count by the 
president that a quorum is not present. 

58. All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made 
for the previous question, and pending such motion, shall be decided, 
whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. (Legislative Manual, 
1000-1901, pp. 30-32.) 

House. 

64. The moticn for the previous question shall be decided without 
debate, and shall take precedence of all other motions except motions 
" to adjourn " or " to lay on the table," and when it is moved the 
question shall be, " Shall the motion for the previous question be sus- 
tained?" If ihis be decided by a majority vote in the affirmative, the 
motion " to adjourn " or " to lay on the table " can still be made, but 
they must be made before the next question, to wit, " Shall the main 
question be now put," is decided in the affirmative, and after said last 
question is affirmatively decided, by a majority vote, said motion will 
be out of order, and fr~e House can not adjourn until the previous ques- 
tion is exhausted or the regular hcur of adjournment arrives. 

65. When the previous question has been ordered the House shall 
proceed to act on the main question without debate, except that before 
the main question is put 20 minutes shall be allowed to the committee 
whose report of the bill or other measure is under consideration to 
close the debate. Where the report of the committee is adverse to the 
passage of the bill or other measure the introducer of the bill shall 
be allowed 20 minutes before the time allowed to the committee for 
clcsing the debate. The chairman of the committee or the introducer 
of the bill or other measure may yield the floor to such Members as he 
may indicate for tne time, or any part of it allowed under this rule. 
This rule shall not be construed to allow the 20 minutes above referred 
to to be used but once on any bill or measure, and then on the final 
passage rf the bill or measure. 

66. After the main question is ordered, any Member may call for 
a division of the House in taking the vote, or may call for the yeas 
and nays ; if the ca.ll for the yeas and nays is sustained by one-fifth 
of the Members voting, the vote shall be taken by the yeas and nays 
and so entered on the Journal. 

67. The effect of the order that the " main question be now put," is 
to bring the House to a vote on pending questions in the order in which 
they stood before it was moved. 

68. After the main question has been ordered, no motion to reconsider 
Bhall be in order until after the vote on the main question is taken 
and announced. 

69. In all cases where a minority report has been submitted on any 
question, if the previous question is ordered, there shall be 20 minutes 

81722—14548 



33 

allowed to the Member whose name is first signed to said minority 
report, or to such Member or Members as he may indicate, for the time 
bo allowed, 01 any part of it, before the 20 minutes allowed to the 
chairman submitting the majority report. . 

70. The previous question may be called and ordered upon a single 
motion or an amendment, or it may be. made to embrace all authorized 
motions or amendments and include the entire bill to its passage or 
rejection. 

71. A call of the House shall not be in order after the previous 
question is ordered, unless it shall appear upon an actual count by 
the Speaker that a quorum is not present. 

72. All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made 
for the previous question, and pending such motion, shall be decided, 
wbet^er on appeal or otherwise, without debate. (Legislative Manual 
1900-1901, pp. 106-108.) 

IDAHO. 

Senate. 

IV, 2. When a question is under debate the president shall receive 
no motion but — 

To adjourn. 

To take a recess. 

To proceed to the consideration of the special order. 

To lay on the table. 

The previous question. 

To close debate at a special time. 

To postpone to a certain day. 

To commit. 

To amend or postpone indefinitely. v 

And they shall take precedence in the order named. (Rules, 1915, 
pp. 21-22.) 

House. 

14. Upon the previous question being ordered by a majority of the 
members present, if a quorum, the effect shall be to cut off debate and 
bring the house to a direct vote upon the pending question. It shall 
■be in order, pending the motion for or after the previous question shall 
have been ordered, for the speaker to entertain and submit a motion 
to commit, with or without instructions, to a standing or select com- 
mittee, which motion shall be decided without debate. 

15. When the previous question is decided in the negative, it shall 
leave the main question under debate for the residue of the sitting, 
unless sooner disposed of. 

16. All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made 
for the previous question, during the pending of such motion or after 
the house shall have determined that the main question shall be put, 
shall be decided, whether an apDeal or otherwise, without debate. 
(Rules, 1915, pp. 3-4.) 

ILLINOIS. 

Senate. 

G2. The previous question shall be stated in this farm : " Shall the 
main question be now put?" and, until it is decided, shall preclude all 
amendments or debate. When it is decided that the main question 
shall now be put, the main question shall be considered as still remain- 
ing under debate. 

63. The effect of the main question being ordered shall be to put an 
end to all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote, first upon all 
amendments reported or pending, in the inverse order in which tbey are 
offered. .After the motion for the previous question has prevailed, it 
Bhall not be in order to move for a call of the senate unfess it shall 
appear by the yeas and nays as taken on the main question that no 
quorum is present, or to move to adjourn, prior to a decision on the 
main question. (Senate journal, 1911, p. 13.) 

House. 

60. The previous question shall be put in this form : " Shall th? 
main question be now put?" and until it is decided snail preclude all 
amendments or debate. When it is decided that the main question 
ehall not now be put, the main question shall be considered as still 
remaining under debate. 

The effect of the main question being ordered shall be to put an 
end to all debate and bring t^e house to a direct vote, first, upon all 
amendments reported or pending in the inverse order in whicb they 
are offered. After the motion for the previous question has prevailed it 
Bhall not be in order to move for a ca»U of the house unless it shall 
81722—14548 3 



mm 



34 

appear by yeas and nays, as taken on the main question, that no 
quorum is present, or to move to adjourn prior to a decision of tho 
main question : Provided, If a motion to postpone is pending the only 
effect of the previous question shall be to bring- the House to a vote 
upon such motion. (House Journal, 1913, p. 318.) 

INDIANA. 

Senate. 
18. The previous question shall be put in this form : " Shall the main 
question be now put?" Until it is decided it shall preclude all debate 
and the introduction of all further amendments. The previous question 
having been ordered, the main question shall be the first question in 
order, and its effect shall be to put an end to all debate and bring 
the senate to a direct vote on the subsidiary questions then pending in 
their order, and then on the main question. When operating under 
the previous question there shall be no debate or explanation of votes. 
(Legislative Manual for 1913, p. G7.) 

Hotisc. 

GO. The previous question shall be put in this form : " Shall tho 
main question he now put?" It shall only be admitted when de- 
manded by a majority of the members present, and its effect shall be 
to put an end to all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon 
a motion to commit if such motion shall have been made, and if this 
motion does not prevail, then upon amendments reported by a com- 
mittee, if any, then upon pending amendments, and then upon tho 
main question. But its only effect, if a motion to postpone is pending, 
shall be to bring the house to a vote upon such motion. On tho 
previous question there shall be no debate. All incidental questions of 
order arising after a motion is made for the previous question, and, 
pending such motion, shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, 
without debate. And after a demand for the previous question has 
been seconded by the house no motion shall be entertained to excuse 
a member from voting. The ordering of the previous question shall 
not prevent a member from explaining his vote, but no member under 
this rule shall be permitted more than one minute for that purpose. 
(Legislative Manual for 1913, p. 82.) 

IOWA. 

Senate. 
, 11. A motion to adjourn, to lay on the table, and for the previous 
question shall be decided without debate, and all incidental questions 
of order arising after a motion is made for the previous question, and 
pending such motion, shall be decided — whether an appeal or other- 
wise — without debate. 

12. The previous question shall be in this form : " Shall the main 
question be now put?" It shall only be admitted when demanded by a 
majority of the members present, and its effect shall be to put an end 
to all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote upon pending amend- 
ments and then upon the main question, unless otherwise indicated by 
the motion and ordered by the senate, except that the member in charge 
of the measure under consideration shall have 10 minutes in which to 
close the discussion immediately before the vote is taken upon the main 
question. If the previous queslion is decided in the negative, the 
senate shall proceed with the matter before it the same as though the 
previous question had not been moved. (Official Register, 1911-12, 
p. 179.) 

House. 

2G. The previous question shall alwavs be put in this form : " Shall 
the main question be now put?" It shall only be admitted when de- 
manded by a majority of the members present, and its effect shall be 
to put an end to all debate and to bring the house to a direct vote upon 
amendments and then upon the main question, unless otherwise indi- 
cated by the motion and ordered by the house, except that the member 
in charge of the measure under consideration shall have 10 minutes in 
which to close the discussion before the vote is taken. On a motion for 
the previous question, and prior to seconding the same, a call of the 
house shall be in order ; but after such motion shall have beei adopted 
no call shall be in order prior to the decision of the main question. If 
the previous question is decided in the negative, the house shall proceed 
with the matter before it the same as though the previous question had 
not been moved. 

27. Motions to lay on the table, to adjourn, and for the previous 
question shall be decided without debate. (Official Register, 1911-12, 
p. loo.) 

81722 — 14548 



35 

KANSAS. 

Senate. 

15. Any five senators shall have the rismt to demand the previous 
question. The previous question shall be as fellows : " Shall the 
main question be now put?"' and unlil it is decided shall preclude all 
amendments or debate. When on taking 'the previous question tho 
senate shall decide that the main question shall not be put. the main 
question shall he considered as still remaining under debate. The main 
question shall be on the passage of the bill, resolution, or other matter 
under consideration ; but when amendments are pending the question 
shall first be taken upon such amendments in their order : and when 
amendments have been adopted in committee of the whole and not 
acted on in the senate, the question shall be taken upon such amend- 
ments in like order, and without further debate or amendment. But 
the previous question can be moved on a pending amendment, and, it 
adopted, debate is closed on the amendment only : and after the amend- 
ment is voted on the main question shall again be open to debate and 
amendments. In this case the question shall be, " Shall the vote now 
be taken on the pending amendment?" (Senate rules, 1913, 1st cd., 
P. 5.) 

House. 

51. The " previous question " shall be as follows : " Shall tho main 
question be now put?" and until it is decided shall preclude all amend- 
ment or debate. When, on* taking the previous question, the bouso 
shall decide that the main question shall not now be put, the main 
question shall be considered as still remaining under debate. The main 
question shall be on the passage of the bill, resolution, or other matter 
under consideration ; but when amendments are pending, the question 
shall first be taken upon such amendments in their order ; and when 
amendments have been adopted by the committee of the whole and not 
acted en in the house, the question shall be taken upon such amend- 
ments in like order, and without further debate or amendment. (House 
Rules, 1913, p. 1G.) 

KENTUCKY. 

Senate. 

55. When the " previous question " has been moved, seconded, and 
adopted a vote shall be immediately taken upon the pending measure 
and such pending amendments as are in order. 

The effact of the "previous question" shall therefore be to put an 
end to all debate ; to prevent the offering of additional amendments, and 
to bring the senate to an immediate vote upon the measure as afore- 
said. 

The previous question may be ordered by a majority of the senators 
voting on that question. On the call of the roll no senator shall be 
allowed to speak more than three minutes to explain his vote and shall 
not speak at ah if the question is not a debatable quesliou. After the 
previous question has been ordered a senator, whose bill or amendment 
or motion — if debatable — is pending, may speak not exceeding 10 min- 
utes thereon, and one senator of the opposition may speak not exceeding 
10 minute?. (Directory, 1914, p. 244.) 

House. 

24. The previous question being moved and seconded, the question from 
the Chair shall be, "Shall the main question be now put?" And if 
the nays prevail, the main question shall not then be out. The effect 
of the previous question shall be to put an end to all debate except on 
the final passage of the measure under consideration ; then the op- 
ponents of the measure shall have 10 minutes to debate the proposi- 
tion and the proposer of the measure shall be limited to 10 minutes to 
close the debate, unless his time be extended by consent of the house, 
and bring the house to a direct vote on amendments proposed by a 
committee, if any ; then on pending amends-ients and all amendments 
which have been read for information of the house by the clerk shall bo 
regarded as pending amendments ; and then upon the main question, 
(Directory, 1914, p. 253.) 

LOUISIANA. 

Information not available. 

MAINE. 

Senate. 
No rule. 

House. 
31. When motion for the previous question is made the consent of 
one-third of the members present shall be necessary to authorize the 
speaker to entertain it. No debate shall be allowed until the matter 
81722—14543 



36 

of consent Is determined. The previous question shall be submitted in 
the following words: "Shall the main question he put now?" No 
member shall speak more than five minutes on the motion for the pre- 
vious question, and while that question is pending a motion to lay on 
the table shall not be decided without debate. A call for the yeas and 
nays or for division of a question shall be in order after the main 
question has been ordered to be put. After the adoption of the pre- 
vious question the vote shall be taken forthwith upon amendments, and 
then upon the main question. (Maine Register, 1914-15, pp. 186-187.) 

MAKYLAXD. 

Senate. 

NO rule. 

House. 

19. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which, being 
ordered by a majority of the members present, shall preclude all fur- 
ther debate and tiring the house to a direct vote upon the immediate 
question or questions on which it has been asked and ordered. It may 
be asked and ordered upon any debatable motion or a series of motions 
to and embracing the main question, if desired. (Maryland Manual, 
1912, p. 287.) 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

Senate. 
47. Debate may be closed at any time not less than one hour from 
the adoption of a motion to that eifect. On this motion not more than 
10 minutes shall be allowed for debate, and no member shall speak 
more than 3 minutes. (Manual for the General Court, 1913, p. 533.) 

House. 

81. The previous question shall be put in the following form : " Shall 
the main question be now put?" and all debate upon the main, question 
Bhall be suspended until the previous question is decided. 

82. On the previous question debate shall be allowed only to give 
reasons why the main question should not be put. 

83. All questions of order arising after a motion is made for the 
previous question shall be decided without debate, excepting on appeal ; 
and on such appeal no member shall speak more than once, without 
leave of the house. 

84. The adoption of the previous question shall put an end to all 
debate, except as provided in rule 8G, and bring the house to a direct 
vote upon pending amendments, if any, in their regular order, and then 
upon the main question. 

85. Debate may be closed at any time not less than 30 minutes from 
the adoption of a motion to that effect. In case the time is extended 
by unanimous consent, the same rule shall apply at the end of the 
extended time as at the time originally fixed. 

86. When debate is closed by ordering the previous question or by 
a vote to close debate at a specified time, the member in charge of the 
measure under consideration shall be allowed to speak 10 minutes and 
may grant to any other member any portion of his time. When the 
measure under consideration has been referred to the committee on 
ways and means, under house rule 44, the member originally reporting 
It shall be considered in charge, except where the report of the com- 
mittee on ways and means is substantially different from that referred 
to them, in which case the member originally reporting the measure 
and the member of the committee on ways and means reporting thereon 
shall each be allowed to speak five minutes, the latter to have the 
close. When the member entitled to speak under this rule is absent, 
the member standing first in order upon the committee reporting the 
measure who is present and joined in the report shall have the right 
to occupy such time. (Manual for the General Court, 1l13, pp. 566- 
568) 

MICHIGAN. 

Senate. 
41. The mode of ordering the previous question shall be as follows : 
Any senator may move the previous question. This being seconded by at 
least one other Senator, the chair shall submit the question in this form, 
"Shall the main question now be put?" This shall be ordered only by 
a majority of the senators present and voting. The effect of ordering 
the previous question shall be to instantly close debate and bring the 
senate to an Immediate vote on the pending question or questions in 
their regular order. The motion for the previous question may be 
limited by the mover to one or more of the questions preceding the 
main question itself, In which case the form shall be, " Shall the ques- 
tion, as limited.be now put?" The yeas and nays may be demanded on 
81722—14548 



37 

fitly; vote under this rule, and a motion for a call of the senate sli all 
be in order at any time prior to the ordering of the previous question. 
Any question of order or appeal from the decision of the chair, pend- 
ing the previous question, shall be decided without debate. When the 
question is on motion to reconsider, under the operation of the pre- 
vious question and it is decided in the affirmative, the previous ques- 
tion shall have no operation upon tbe question to be reconsidered. If 
the senate refuses to order the previous question, the consideration 
of the subject shall be resumed, as if no motion therefor had been made. 
(Michigan Manual, 1913, p. 5SG.) 

House, 
51. The method of ordering the previous question shall be as follows : 
Any member may move the previous question. This being seconded by 
at least 10 members, the chair shall put the question, " Shall the main 
question now be out?" This shall be ordered only by a majority of 
the members present and voting. After the seconding of the previous 
question, and prior to ordering the same, a call of the house may be 
moved and ordered, but after ordering the previous question nothing 
shall be in order prior to the decision of the pending questions, except 
demands for yeas and nays, points of order, and appeals from the de- 
cision of the chair, which shall be decided without debate. The effect 
of the previous question shall be to put an end to all debate and bring 
the house to a direct vote upon all pending questions in their order 
down to and including the main question. When a motion to recon- 
sider is taken under the previous question, and is decided in the affirma- 
tive, the previous question shall have no operation upon the question to 
be reconsidered. If the house shall refuse to order the main question, 
the consideration of t^e subject shall be resumed, as though no motion 
for the pre7ious question had been made. (Michigan Manual, 1913. p. 
594-595.) 

MINNESOTA. 

Senate. 

25. The previous question shall be in this form : " Shall the main 
question be now put?" It shall only be admitted when demanded by 
a majority of the members present, and its effect shall be to put an end 
to all debate, and bring the Senate to a direct vote upon amendments 
reported by a committee, if any, then upon all pending amendments in 
their order, and then upon the main question. On a motion for the 
previous question, and prior to the ordering of the same, a call of 
the senate shall be in order, but after a majority shall have ordered such 
motion, no call shall be in order prior to the decision of the main 
question. 

26. On a previous question there shall be no debate. All incidental 
questions of order arising after a motion is made for the previous ques- 
tion, and pending such motion, shall be decided, whether on apneal or 
otherwise, without debate. (Legislative Manual, Minnesota, 1913, p. 

House. 

30. (a) The previous question shall be in this form: "The gentleman 

from moves the previous question. Do 10 members second the 

motion?" If tbe motion be properly seconded, the question shall be 
stated, as follows : "As many as are"in favor of ordering the previous 
question will say 'Aye': as manv as are opposed wil say 'No.'" 

There sball be a motion for tbe previous question which, being or- 
dered by a majority of all members present, shall have the effect to cut 
off all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon the immediate 
question or questions upon which it has been asked or ordered. 

The previous question may be asked and ordered upon a single mo- 
tion, a series of motions allowable under the rules, or an amendment or 
amendments ; or it may be made to embrace all authorized motions or 
amendments and include the bill to its passage or rejection. 

(b) A call of the house shall net be in order after the previous ques- 
tion is ordered unless it shall appear that a quorum is not present. 

(c) When the previous question is decided in the negative, it shall 
leave the main question under debate for the residue of the sitting 
unless sooner disposed of by taking a vote on tbe question or in some 
other manner. (Legislative Manual, Minnesota, 1913, p. 169.) 

MISSISSIPPI. 

Information not available. 

mis sou EI. 

Senate. 

47. The previous question shall be in this form : *' Shall the main 

question be now put?" It shall only be admitted on demand of two 

senators and sustained by a vote of a majority of the senators present* 

81722—14548 



38 

and its effect shall put an end to all debate and bring the senate to a 
direct vote upon a motion to commit if such motion shall have been 
made: and if this motion decs not prevail, then upon amendments re- 
ported by a committee, if any, then upon pending amendments, and then 
upon the main question. On demand of the previous question, a call of 
the senate shall be in order, but after a majority have sustained such a 
motion no call shall be in order prior to the decision on the main 
Question. 

48. On motion for the previous question no debate shall be allowed, 
and all incidental questions of order arising after the motion is made for 
the previous question, and. ponding such motion, shall be decided, en 
appeal or. otherwise, without debate. If, on a vote for the previous ques- 
tion, a majority of the senators vote in the negative, then the further 
consideration of the subject matter shall be in order. (Senate Journal, 
1911, p. 37.) 

House. 

57. The previous question shall be in this form: "Shall the question 
now under immediate consideration be now put?" It may be moved 
and seconded like any other question, but it shall only prevail when 
SUpnorted by a majority of the members present, and, until decided, 
shall preclude amendment and debate: and a failure to sustain the same 
shall not put the matter under consideration from before the house, but 
the house shall proceed as if said motion had not been made. (House 
Journal, 1911, p. 21.) 

MONTANA. 

Senate. 

SO. The previous question s^all bo in this form : " Shall the main 
question be now put." It shall only be admitted when demanded by 
n majority of the senators present, upon division, and its effect shall 
be to put an end to all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote 
upon amendments reported by a committee, if any, upon pending amend- 
ments, and then upon the main Question. On a motion for the previous 
question, and prior to t^c seconding of the same, a call of the senate 
shall be in order, but after a majority of the senators have seconded 
such motion no call shall be in order prior to the decision of the main 
question. If the previous queslion is negatived, the senate shall pro- 
ceed in the same manner as if the motion had not been made. 

St. On a motion for the nrevious question and under the previous 
question there shall be no debate; and all incidental questions of order 
arising after a motion is made for t^e previous question (or while act- 
ing under the previous question) shall be decided, whether on appeal or 
otherwise, without debate. (Legislative Manual, 1S95, pp. 23-24.) 

House. 

XXIIT. 1. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which, 
being ordered by a majority, if a quorum be present, shall have the 
effect 1o cut off all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon 
the immediate question or questions on which it has been asked or 
ordered : Provider!. That when the previous question is ordered on any 
proposition on which there has been no debate it shall be in order to 
debate the proposition to be voted on for SO minutes, one-half of such 
time to be given to debate in favor of and one-half in debate in oppo- 
sition to such proposition The previous question may be asked and 
ordered upon a single motion, a series of motions allowable under the 
rules, or an amendment or amendments, and include the bill to its pas- 
sage or rejection. It shall Le in order, pending the motion for or after 
the nrevious question shall have been ordered on its passage, for the 
speaker to entertain and submit motion to commit, with or without 
instructions, to a standing or select committee ; and a motion to lay 
noon the table shall be in order on the second and third reading of a 
bill. 

2. A call of the house shall not be in order after the previous ques- 
tion is ordered unless it shall appear upon an actual count by the 
speaker that a quorum is not present. 

S. All incidental questions of order arising from, after a motion is 
made for the previous question, and pending such motion shall be de- 
cided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. (Legislative 
Manual, 1S95, pp. 34-25.) 

NEBRASKA. 

Beit ate. 
1G. When a question Is under debate no motion can be received but 
to adjourn,, for the previous question, to lay on the table, to postpone 
indefinitely, to postpone to a certain day, to commit, or amend, which 
several motions shall have precedence in the order they stand arranged. 
(Legislative Manual, 1911-12, p. 112.) 
81722—14548 



39 

House. 

2G. The previous question shall be in this form : " Shall the debate 
now close?" It shall be admitted when demanded by five or mo?e 
members and must be sustained by a majority vote, and until decided 
shall preclude further debate and all amendments and motions except 
one motion to adjourn and one motion to lay on the table. 

27. On a previous question there shall be no debate. All incidental 
questions of order arising after a motion is made for the previous 
question and pending such motion shall be decided, whether on apneal 
or otherwise, without debate. (Legislative Manual, 1911-12, p. 153.) 

NEVADA. 

Senate. 
18. The previous question shall not be put unless demanded by three 
Senators, and it shall be in this form : " Shall the main question be 
now put?" When sustained by a majority of senators present it shall 
put an end to all debate and bring the senate to a vote on the question 
or questions before it, and all incidental questions arising after the 
motion was made shail be decided without debate. (Appendix to Jour- 
nals, 1911, v. 1, p. 125.) 

Assembly. 

33. The previous question shall ue in this form : " Shall the main 
question be now put?" and its effect, when sustained by a majority of 
the members elected, shall be to put an end to all debate and bring 
the house to a vote on the question or Questions before it. 

34. All incidental questions arising after a motion is made for the 
previous question and pending such motion or previous question shall 
be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. 

35. The previous question shall only be put when demanded by three 
members. (Appendix to Journals, 1911, v. 1, p. 141.) 

NEW IIAiMPSHIEE. 

Senate. 
No rule. 

House. 

23. The speaker shall put the previous question in the following 
form: "Shall the main question now be put?" and all debate upon the 
main question shall be suspended until the previous question has been 
decided. After the adoption of the previous question, the sense of 
the house shall forthwith be taken upon pending amendments, in their 
regular order, and then upon the main question. The motion for the 
previous question sball not be put unless demanded by three members. 

24. All incidental questions of order arising after a motion for the 
previous question and related to the subjects affected by the order of 
the previous question shall be decided without debate. 

25. If the previous question is decided in the negative, it shall not 
be again in order until after adjournment, but the main question shall 
be left before the houre and disposed of as though the previous question 
had not been put. (Manual for the General Court, 1913, pp. 407-408.) 

NEW 5ERSEY. 

Senate, 

No rule. 

House. 

33. The previous question shall be put in this form : " Shall the 
main question be now put?" It shall only be admitted when demanded 
by a majority of the members present, and its effect shall be, if decided 
affirmatively, to put an end to all debate, and brina; the house to a 
direct vote upon amendments reported by a committee, if any, then 
upon pending amendments, and then upon the main question ; if decided 
in the negative, to leave the main question and amendments, if any, 
under debate for the residue of the sitting, unless sooner disposed of 
by taking the question, or in some other manner. All incidental ques- 
tions of order arising after a motion is made for the previous question, 
and pending such motion, shall be decided, whether on appeal or other- 
wise, without debate. (Legislative Manual, 1914, p. 84.) 

NEW MEXICO. 

Information not available, except that before inauguration of state- 
hood previous question in both houses was allowed. (Council Rules, 
1907, p. 8; House Rules, 1901, p. 11.) 

NEW YORK. 

Senate. 
- 32. When any bill, resolution, or motion shall have been under con- 
sideration for six hours it shall be in order for any senator to move 
81722—14548 



40 

fro close; debate, and the president shall recognize the senator who 
wishes to make such motion. Such motion shall not be amendable 
or debatable and shall be immediately put, and if it shall receive the 
affirmative votes of a majority of the senators present, the pending 
measure shall take precedence over all other business. The vcte shall 
thereupon be taken upon such bill, motion, or resolution, with such 
amendments as mav be pending at the time of such motion according 
to the rules of the senate, but without further "debate, except that any 
senator who mav desire so to do shall be permitted to sneak thereon 
not more than once and not exceeding one-half hour. After such mo- 
tion to close debate has been made by any senator, no other motion 
shall be in order until such motion has been voted upon by the senate. 
After the senate shall have adopted the motion to close debate, as here- 
inbefore provided, no motion shall be in order but one motion to ad- 
journ and a motion to commit. Should said motion to adjourn be car- 
ried the measure under consideration shall be the pending question 
when the senate shall again convene and shall be taken up at tne time 
of such adjournment. The motion to close debate may be ordered upon 
a single motion, a series of motions allowable under the rules, or an 
amendment or amendments, or may be made to embrace all authorized 
motions or amendments and include the bill, resolution, or motion to its 
passage or rejection. All incidental questions of order, or motions 
pending at the time such motion is made to close debate, whether the 
same be on appeal or otherwise, shall be decided without debate. (Red 
Book, 1914, pp. 627-628.) 

House. 
29. The " previous question " shall be put as follows : " Shall the 
main question now be put?" and until it is decided, shall preclude all 
amendments or debate. When on taking the previous question the 
house shall decide that the main question shall not now bo put, the 
main question shall be cons'dered as still remaining under debate. The 
"main question" shall be the advancement or passage of the bill, reso- 
lution, or other matter under consideration ; but when amendments are 
pending, the question shall first be taken upon such amendments in theiv 
order. (Red Book, 1914, p. 659.) 

NORTH CAROLINA. 

Senate. 

24. The previous question shall be as follows: "Shall the main 
question be put?" and, until it is decided, shall preclude all amend- 
ments and debate. If this question shall be decided in the affirmative, 
the " main question " shall be on the passage of the bill, resolution, or 
other matter under consideration ; but when amendments are pending 
the question shall be taken upon such amendments, in their order, 
without further debate or amendment. However, any senator may 
move the previous question and may restrict the same to an amend- 
ment or other matter then under discussion. If such question be 
decided in the negative, the main question shall be considered as re- 
maining under debate. 

25. When the motion for the previous question is made, and pending 
the second thereto by a majority, debate shall cease, and only a motion 
to adjourn or lay on the table shall be in order, which motions shall be 
put as follows : Previous question ; adjourn ; lay on the table. After 
a motion for the previous question is made, pending a second thereto, 
any member may give notice that he desires to offer an amendment to 
the bill or other matter under consideration, and after the previous 
question is seconded, such member s'^all be entitled to offer his amend- 
ment in pursuance of such notice. (Manual, 1913, p. 21.) 

House. 
56. The previous question shall be as follows : " Shall the main 
question be now put?" and, until it is decided, shall preclude all 
amendments and debate. If this question shall be decided in the 
affirmative, the " main question " shall be on the passage of the bill, 
resolution, or other matter under consideration, but when amendments 
are pending, the question shall be taken upon such amendments, in 
their order, without further debate or amendment. If such question 
be decided in the negative, the main question shall be considered as 
remaining under debate : Provided, That no one shall move the previous 
question except the member sdbmitting the report on the bill or other 
matter under consideration, and the member introducing the bill or 
other matter under consideration, or the member in charge of the 
measure, who shall be designated by the chairman of the committee 
reporting the same to the house at the time the bill or other matter 
under consideration is reported to the house or taken up for considera- 
tion. 

81722—14548 



41 

When a motion for the previous question is made, and pending the 
second thereto by a majority, debate shall cease; but if any member 
obtains the floor he may move to lay the matter under consideration 
on the table, or move an adjournment, and when both or either of these 
motions are pending the question shall stand : 

(1) Previous question. 

(2) To adjourn. 

(3) To lay on the table. 

And then upon the main question, or amendments, or the motion to 
postpone indefinitely, postpone to a day certain, to commit, or amend, 
in the order of their precedence, until the main question is reached or 
disposed of ; but after the previous question has been called by a ma- 
jority no motion, amendment, or debate shall be in order. 

All motions below the motion to lay on the table must be made prior 
to a motion for the previous question ; but, pending and not after the 
second therefor, by the majority of the house, a motion to adjourn 
or lay on the table, or both, are in order. This constitutes the prece- 
dence of the motion to adjourn and lay on the table over other motions 
in rule 25. , nr% 

Motions stand as follows in order of precedence m rule 2G : Lay on 
the table, previous question, postpone indefinitely, postpone definitely, 
to commit or amend. 

When the previous question is called all motions below it fall, unless 
made nrior to the call, and all motions above it after its second by a 
majority required. Tending the second, the motions to adjourn and 
lay on the table are in order, but not after a second. When in order 
and every motion is before the house, the question stands as follows : 
Previous 'question, adjourn, lay on the table, postpone indefinitely, post- 
pone definitely, to commit, amendment to amendment, amendment, sub- 
stitute, bill. 

The previous question covers all other motions when seconded by a 
majority of the house, and proceeds by regular gradation to the main 
question, without debate, amendment, or motion, until such question is 
reached or disposed of. (House Rules, 1915, pp. 8-10.) 

NOETH DAKOTA. 

Senate. 
8. When a question is under debate no motion shall be received except 
to adjourn, to lay on the table, to move for the previous question, to 
move to postpone to a day certain, to commit or amend, to postpone 
indefinitely, which several motions shall have precedence in the order 
in which they are named, and no motion to postpone to a day certain, 
to commit, to postpone indefinitely, having been decided, shall be enter- 
tained on the same day and at the same stage of the bill or proposition. 
(Senate Rules, 1915, p. 11.) 

House. 

14. The previous question shall he in this form : " Shall the main 
question he now put?" It shall be admitted only when demanded by 
a majority of the members present, and its effect shall be to put an end 
to all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon the amendments 
reported by a committee, if any, "upon the pending amendments and 
then upon the main question. On a motion for the previous question, 
and prior to the seconding of the same, a call of the house shall be in 
order, but after a majority shall have seconded such motion no call 
shall be in order prior to decision of the main question. 

15. When the previous question is decided in the negative it shall 
leave the main question under debate for the remainder of the sitting 
unless sooner disposed of in some other manner. 

16. All incidental questions of order arising after motion is made for 
the previous question, during the pendency of such motion, or after the 
house shall have determined that the main csuestion shall be now put 
shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. 
(House Rules, 1915, pp. 13-14.) 

onio. 
Senate. 
105. A motion for the previous question shall be entertained only 
upon the demand of three senators. The president shall put the ques- 
tion in this form: "The question is, Shall the debate now close?" and 
until decided it shall preclude further debate and all amendments and 
motions, except one motion to adjourn, one motion to take a recess, one 
motion to lay on the table, and one call of the senate. 

103. All incidental questions or questions of order arising after the 
demand for the previous question is made shall be decided without de- 
bate and shall not he subject to appeal. 
81722—14548 



42 

107. After the demand for the previous question has been sustained 
no call or motion shall be in order, but the senate shall be brought to 
an immediate vote, first upon the main question. 

108. Agreement to a motion to reconsidpr a vote on a " main nues- 
tion " shall not revive the " previous question," but tbe matter shall be 
subject to amendment and debate. (Legislative Manual, 1912, pp. 
22-23.) 

iioasc. 

52. The previous question shall be in this form : " Shall the debate 
now close?" It shall be permitted when demanded by five or more 
-members, and must be sustained by a majority vote, and, until decided, 
shall preclude further debate, and all amendments and motions, except 
one motion to adjourn, and one motion to lay on table. 

53. All incidental questions or questions of order arising after n 
motion is made for the previous question, and pending such motion, 
sua 1 ! be decided without debate and shall not be subject to apueal. 

54. On a motion for the previous question, and prior to voting on the 
same, a call of the house shall be in order; but after tbe demand for 
the previous question shall have been sustained no call shall be in order; 
and the house shall be brought to an immediate vote, first upon the 
pending amendments in the inverse order of their age, and then upon 
the main question. 

55. If a motion for the previous question be net sustained, the sub- 
ject under consideration shall be proceeded with the same as if the 
motion had not been made. (Legislative Manual, 1012, pp. 69-70.) 

OKLAHOMA. 

Senate. 
33 (a) There shall be a motion for the previous question, which shall 
be stated in these words, to wit, "Shall the main question bo now 
put?" which, being ordered by a majority of the members voting, if 
a quorum be present, shall have the effect to cut off all debate and 
bring the house to a direct vote upon the immediate question or ques- 
tions on which it has been asked and ordered. The previous question 
may be asked and ordered upon a single motion, a series of motions 
allowable under the rules, cr an amendment or amendments, and in- 
clude the bill to its passage or rejection. It shall be in order, pending 
the motion for or after the previous question, for the president to 
entertain and submit a motion to commit with or without instructions 
to a standing or select committee. (Jefferson's Manual, sec. 34.) 

(b) If the previous question is carried, the original mover of the 
main question, or, if the bill or resolution originated in tbe other 
house, then the chairman of the committee reporting tbe same, shall 
have the right to close the debate and be limited to 15 minutes, and 
should the previous question be ordered on a subject debatable before 
the same has been debated the friends and opponents of the measure 
shall have 30 minutes on either side in which to debate the question if 
desired. (Jefferson's Manual, sec. 34; Red Book, 1912, v. 2, p. 109.) 

House. 
44. When any debatable question is before the house any member 
may move the previous question, but before it if put it shall be sec- 
onded by at least five members whether that question (called the main 
question) shall now be put. If it passes in the affirmative, then the 
main question is to be put immediately, and no member shall debate 
it further, either add to it or alter: Provided, That after the previous 
question shall have been adopted the mover of the main question or 
the chairman of the committee shall have the privilege of closing the 
debate and be limited to one-fourth hour: Provided further. That when 
the previous question has been ordered on a debatable proposition which 
has not been debated 15 minutes in the aggregate shall be allowed the 
friends and opponents of the proposition each before putting the main 
question. (Red Book, 1912. v. 2, p 98.) 

OREGON. 

Senate. 
37. The previous question shall be put in the following form : " Shall 
the mam question now be put?" It shall only be admitted when de- 
manded by a majority of the senators present, and its effect shall be 
to put an end to all debate, except that the author of the bill or other 
matter before the senate, shall have the right to close, and the subject 
under discussion shall thereupon be immediately put to a vote. On a 
motion for the previous question, prior to a vote of the senate being 

ta HflU v a cal1 of the senate shall be in order. (Senate Journal. 1911, 
p. 3oD.) ' 

81722—14548 



43 

House. 

30. The previous question shall bo put in this form : " Shall the 
main question be now put?" It shall only be admitted when demanded 
by a majority cf the members present, and, until it is decided, shall 
preclude all amendment and further debate on the main question except 
by the mover of the original motion, who shall be allowed 10 minutes. 
On a motion for the previous question, a roll call shall be in order if 
demanded by two members. 

31. On a previous question there shall be no debate ; all incidental 
questions of order arising after a motion is made for the previous ques- 
tion, and pending such motion, shall be decided, whether an appeal or 
otherwise, without debate. (House rules, 1909, p. 7.) 

PENNSYLVANIA. 

Senate. 

9. The motion for the previous question, for postponement, for com- 
mitment, and for amendment, shal.l take precedence in the order men- 
tioned, and a motion for the previous question shall preclude any of 
the other motions from being made; a motion to postpone shall preclude. 
a motion to commit : or to amend a motion to commit shall preclude a 
motion to amend. The motion for the previous question, postponement 
(other than indefinite postponement), or commitment shall preclude de- 
bate on the original subject. The previous question shall not be moved 
by less than four members. 

10. When a call for the. previous question has been made and sus- 
tained, the question shall be upon pending amendments and the main 
question in their regular order, and all incidental questions of order 
arising after a motion for the previous question has been made, and 
ponding such motion shall be decided, whether on anpeal or other- 
wise, without debate. (Smull's Legislative Handbook, 1914, p. 1000.) 

House. 
21. The previous question shall not be moved by less than 20 mem- 
bers rising for that purpose, and shall be determined without debate; 
but when the previous question has been called and sustained it shall 
not cut off any pending amendment, but the vote shall be taken without 
debate, on the amendments in their order and then on the main ques- 
tion. (Smuil's Legislative Handbook, 1914, p. 1031.) 

EHODE ISLAND. 

Senate. 

20. There shall he a motion for the previous question, which shall not 
bo debatable, and which may be asked and ordered upon any bill or sec- 
tion thereof, amendment, motion, resolution, or question which is 
debatable, any of which shall be considered as the main question for 
the purpose of apnlying the previous question. All incidental questions 
of crder arising after a motion for the previous question has been made, 
and before the voie has been taken on i lie main question, shall be de- 
cided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. 

When the previous question has been ordered a motion to reconsider 
(Such vote shall not be in order, and no motion to adjourn while a 
quorum is present shall be entertained between the taking of such vote 
and the taking of the vote on the main question, but 10 minutes shall 
be allowed for further cebate upon the main question, during which no 
member shall speak moie than 3 minutes, and a further period of 10 
minutes, if desired, shall be allowed for debate to the member introduc- 
ing the bill or question to be acted upon, or to the member or members 
to- whom he may yield the floor, at the close of which time, or at tho 
close of the first io minutes, in case the introducer does not desire to 
so use his time, the vote on the main question shall be taken. Tf inci- 
dental questions of order are raised after the previous question has 
been ordered, the time occupied in deciding such questions shall be 
deducted from the time allowed for debate. (Manual, 1914, p. 359.) 

House. 

29. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which shall not 
be debatable, and which may be moved, and ordered upon any bill or sec- 
tion thereof, amendment, motion, resolution, or question which is debat- 
able, any of which shall be considered as the main question for the pur- 
pose of applying the previous question. When a motion for the previous 
question has been made, no other motion shall be entertained by the 
speaker until it has been put to the house and decided. All incidental 
questions of order arising after a motion for the previous question has 
been made, and before the vote has been taken on the main question, 
shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. When 
the previous question has been ordered a motion to reconsider such vote 
81722—14548 



44 

shall not be in order, and no motion to adjourn or to take a recess while 
a quorum is present shall he entertained between the taking of such vote 
and the taking of the vote on the main question, but 10 minutes shall 
be allowed for further debate upon the main question, during which no 
member shall sneak more than 3 minutes, and a further period of 10 
minutes, if desired, shall be allowed for debate to the member intro- 
ducing the bill or question to be acted upon, or to the member or mem- 
bers to whom he may yield the floor, at the close of which time, or at 
the close of the first 10 minutes, in case the introducer does not desire 
to so use his time, the vote on the main question shall be taken. If 
incidental questions of order are raised after the previous question has 
been ordered, the lime occupied in deciding such questions shall be 
deducted from the time allowed for debate. (Manual, 1914, p. 367.) 

SOUTH CAROLINA. 

No information available. 

SOUTH DAKOTA. 

Senate. 

62. The previous question shall be stated in this form: "Shall the 
main question be new pat?" and until it is decided shall preclude all 
amendments or debate. When it is decided the main question shall not 
be now nut, the main question shall be considered as still remaining 
under debate. 

63. The effect of the main question being ordered shall be to put 
an end to all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote, first, unon 
all amendments reported or pending in the inverse order in which they 
are offered. After a motion frr the previous question has prevailed, it 
shall not be in order to move a call of the senate or to move to 
adjourn, prior to a decision of the main question. 

64. The senate may at any time, by a majority vote, close all debate 
upon a pending amendment, or an amendment thereto, and cause the 
question to be put thereon, and this does not preclude further amend- 
ments or debate on the main subject. (Manual 1913, p. 565-566.) 

House. 

15. On a motion for the previous question and prior to voting on the 
same, a call of the house shall be in order, but after the demand for 
the pre virus question shall have been sustained, no call shall be in 
order, and the house shall be brought to an immediate vote — first, 
upon the pending amendments in the inverse order of their age, and 
then upon the main question. The previous question may be ordered 
upon all recognized motions or amendments which are debatable, and 
shall have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the assembly to 
a direct vcte upon the motion or amendment on which it has been 
ordered. 

16. When the previous question is decided in the negative it shall 
leave the main question under debate for the residue of the sitting, 
unless sooner disposed of by taking the question, or in some othe?.' 
manner. 

17. All incidental questions cf order arising after motion is made for 
the previous question, during the pending of such motions or after the 
House shall have determined that the main question shall now be put, 
shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate. 
(Manual 1913, p. 569.) 

TENNESSEE. 

Senate. 

22. The previous question shall be in this form : " Shall the main 
cTUestion be now put?" It shall be admitted only when demanded by 
a maiority of the members present. If the previous question is sus- 
tained, its effect shall be to preclude all future amendments, and termin- 
ate all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote unon the subiect 
or matter to which it was applied in the call. (Manual 1890, p. 157.> 

House. 

55. The previous question shall be in this form :." Shall the main 
question be now pat?' It shall only be admitted when demanded by 
two-thirds of the members present. And if the call is made and sus- 
tained, its effect shall be to preclude all future amendments and termi- 
nate all debate ; but it may be applied to the main question, or to the 
main question and amendment, or the main question, amendment, and 
amendment to the amendment, and shall bring the house to a direct 
vote on the question in the order in which they stand and from tho 
point where the call was applied. But in all debates upon resolu- 
tions or bills immediately prior to their final passage on third reading 
the mover or author of the resolution or bill shall have the right to 
81722— -14548 



45 

close the debate thereon, and do call for the previous question, nor 
any other motion, shall cut off this right in the mover or author of the 
measure. (Manual, 1890, p. .154. ) 

TEXAS. 

Senate. 
90. Tending the consideration of any question before the senate, any 
senator may call for the previous question, and if seconded by five sena- 
tors the presiding officer s'jall submit the question, " Shall the main 
question dow be put?" And if a majority vote is in favor of it, the 
main question shall be ordered, the effect of which shall be to cut off 
all further amendments and debate and bring the senate to a direct 
vote — first, upon pending amendments and motions, if there be any : 
then upon the main proposition. The previous question may be ordered 
on any pending amendment or motion before the senate as a separate 
proposition and be decided bv a vote upon said amendment or motion. 
(Senate Journal, 1911, p. 172.) 

House. 

XIII. 

1. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which shall 
be admitted on]y when seconded by twenty-five (25) members. It shall 
be put by the chair in this manner : " The motion has been seconded. 
As many as are in favor of ordering the previous question on (here 
state on what question or questions) will say ' aye,' " and then, "As 
many as are oppesed say ' no.' " If ordered by a majority of the mem- 
bers voting, a quorum being present, it shall have the effect of cutting 
off all debate and bringing the house to a direct vote upon the imme- 
diate question or questions upon which it has been asked and ordered. 

2. The previous question may be asked and ordered upon any debat- 
able single motion or series of motions allowable under the rules, or an 
amendment or amendments, or may be made to embrace all authorized 
debatable motions or amendments, and include the bill or resolution to 
its passage or rejection. It may be applied to motions to postpone to a 
fi-iv certain, or indefinitely, or to commit, and can not be laid upon the 
table. 

3. On the motion for the previous question there shall be no debate, 
and all incidental questions of order after it is made, and pending such 
motion, shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without 
debate. 

4. After the previous question has been ordered there shall be no 
debate upon the questions on which it has been ordered, or upon inci- 
dental questions, except only that the mover of the proposition or the 
member making the report from the committee, as the case may be, 
or, in case of the absence of either of them, any other member desig- 
ns fpd by snen absentee, shall have the right to close the debate, after 
which a vote shall be immediately fallen on the amendments, if any 
there were, and then on the main question. 

5. When the previous question is ordered upon a motion to post- 

Eone indefinitely cr to amend by striking out the enacting clause of a 
ill the mover of a proposition or bill proposed to be so postponed or 
nmended. or the member reporting the same from a committee, shall 
Lave the right to close the debate on the original proposition, after 
which ihe member moving to postpone or amend shall be allowed to 
close the debate on bis motion or amendment. 

0. No motion for an adjournment or recess shall be in order after 
the previous question is seconded until the final vote upon the main 
question shall be taken, unless the roll call shows the absence of a 
quorum. 

7. A call of the House may be moved after the previous question 
has been ordered. (House Journal, 1913, p. 70.) 

UTAH. 

Senate. 
No rule. 

House. 
SO. The previous question shall be in this form : " Shall the question 
be now put?" And its effect, when sustained by a majority of the 
members present, shall be to put an end to all debate, except as to the 
mover of the matter pending or the chairman of the committee who 
reported it, who shail be privileged to close the debate and bring the 
House to a vote on the question or questions before it: Provided, That 
when a motion to amend or to commit is pending its effect shall be 
to cut off debate and bring the house to a vote on the motion to amend 
or commit only and not upon the question to be amended or com- 
81722—14548 



46 

mitted. All incidental questions arising after motion is made for th© 
previous question shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, 
without debate. The previous question shall be put only when de- 
manded by two members. (House Journal, 1913, p. — .) 

VERMONT. 

Senate. 

2G. A call for the previous question shall not at any time be in 
order. A motion to adjourn shall always be in order, except when 
the Senate is engaged in voting. (Senate Rules, 1915, p. 17.) 

House. 

33. At any time in the course of debate on a debatable question a 
member may move " that debate upon the pending question do now 
clcse," and the speaker shall put the question to the house without 
debate, and if the motion is decided in the affirmative debate shall bo 
closed on the immediate pending question. Or a member may movo 
"that debate on the whole question do now close." and if the 'motion 
be decided in the affirmative debate shall be closed on the whole 
question and the main question shall be put in its order, and no 
motion, except a motion to substitute either of said motions for the 
other, shall be in order until the main question is put and decided. 
(House Rules, 1915, p. 40.) 

VIRGINIA. 

Senate. 

49. Upon a motion for the pending question, seconded by a majority 
of the senators present, indicated by a rising or by a recorded vote, 
the president shall immediately put the pending question, and all inci- 
dental questions of order arising after a moiion for the pending 
question is made, and, pending such motion, shall be decided, whether 
on appeal or otherwise, without debate. 

50. Upon a motion for tne previous question seconded by a majority 
of the senator* present, indicated by a rising or by a recorded vote, 
the president shall immediately put the question; first, upon amend- 
ments in the order prescribed in the rules, and then upon the main 
question. If the previous question be net ordered, debate may continue 
as if the motion had not been made. (Rules, 1914, pp. 16-17.) 

House. 

GTi. Tending a debate any member who obtains the floor for that 
purpose only and submits no other motion or remark may move for the 
' previous question " or ..he " pending question," and in either case the 
motion shall be forthwith put to the house. Two-thirds of the members 
present shall be required to order the main question, bat a majority 
may require an immediate vote upon the pending question, whatever it 
may be. 

GG. The previous question shall be in this form : " Shall the main 
question now be put?" If carried, its effect shall be to put an end to 
all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon a motion to com- 
mit if pending, then upon amendments reported b.v a committee if any, 
then upon pending amendments, and then upon the main question. If 
upon the motion for the previous question the main question be not 
ordered, debate may continue as if the motion had not been made. 
(Rules, 1914, pp. 39-40.) 

WASHINGTON. 

Senate. 

39. The previous question shall not be put unless demanded by three, 
senators whose names sball be entered upon the journal, and it shall 
then be in this form: "Shall the main question be now put?" When 
sustained by a majority of senators present it shall preclude all debate, 
and the roll shall be immediately called on the question or questions 
before the senate, and all incidental question or questions of order 
arising after the motion is made after the previous question and pending 
such motion shall be decided whether on anneal or otherwise without 
debate. (Legislative Manual, 1911, pp. 36-37.) 

House. 

27. The previous question may be ordered by two-thirds of the mem- 
bers present upon all recognized motions or amendments which are 
debatable, and shall have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the 
house to a direct vote upon the motion or amendment on which it has 
been ordered. On motion for the previous question and prior to the 
seconding of the same a call of the house shall be in order, but such 
call shall not be in order thereafter prior to the decision of the main 
question. 

81722—14548 



47 

* 

The question is not debatable and can not be amended. Tbe previous 

question shall be put in this form : " Mr. demands the previous 

question. As many as are in favor of ordering the previous question 
will say 'Aye ' ; as many as are opposed will say ' No.' " 

The results of the motion are as follows : 

If determined in the negative, the consideration goes on as if the 
motion had never been made ; if decided in the affirmative, the presiding 
officer at once, and without debate, proceeds to put, first, the amend- 
ments pending and then the main question as amended. If an adjourn- 
ment is had after the previous question is ordered, the subject comes 
up the first thing after the reading of the journal the next day, and 
the previous question privileged over all other business, whether new or 
unfinished. (Legislative Manual, 1011, p. 51.) 

WEST VIRGINIA. 

Senate. 
5G. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which, being 
ordered by a majority of members present, if a quorum, shall have the 
effect to cut off all debate and bring the senate to direct vote upon the 
immediate question or questions on which it has been asked and ordered. 
The previous question may be asked and ordered upon a single motion, 
a series of motions, or may be made to embrace all authorized motions 
and amendments and include the hill to its engrossment and third read- 
ing, and then, on renewal and second of said motion, to its passage or 
rejection. It shall be in order, pending a motion for or after the pre- 
vious question shall have been ordered on its passage, for the president 
to entertain and submit a motion to commit, with or without instruc- 
tion, to a standing or select committee ; and a motion to lay upon the 
table shall be in order on the second and third reading of a bill. 

(2) A call of the senate shall not be in order after the previous ques- 
tion is in order unless it shall appear upon an actual count by the 
president that a quorum is not present. 

(3) All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made 
for the previous question, and, pending such motion, shall be decided, 
whether an appeal or otherwise, without debate. (Legislative Manual, 
1913, p. 44-45.) 

House. 

78. If the previous question be demanded by not less than seven 
members, the speaker shall, without debate, put the question, '■ Shall the 
main question be now put?" If this question be decided in the affirma- 
tive, all further debate shall cease and the vote be at once taken on the 
proposition pending before the house. When the house refuses to order 
the main question, the consideration of the subject shall be resumed as 
if the previous question had not been demanded. 

70. The previous question shall not be admitted in the committee of 
the whole. (Legislative Manual, 1913, p. 70.) 

WISCONSIN. 

Senate and house. 

80. Moving previous question. When any bill, memorial, or resolution 
is under consideration, any member being in order and having the floor 
may move the " previous question,'' but such motion must be seconded 
by at least 5 senators or 15 members of the assembly. 

81. Putting of motion ; ending debate. The previous question being 
moved, the presiding officer shall say, " It requiring 5 senators or 15 
members of the assembly, as the case may be, to second the motion for 
the previous question, those in favor of sustaining the motion will 
rise." And if a sufficient number rise, the previous question shall be 
thereby seconded, and the question shall then be : " Shall the main ques- 
tion be now put?" which auestion shall be determined by the yeas and 
nays. The main question being ordered to be now put, its effects shall 
be to put an end to all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon 
the pending amendments, if there be any, and then upon the main 
question. 

82. Main question may remain before house, when. On taking the 
previous question, the house shall decide that the main question 'shall 
not now be put, the main question shall remain as the question before 
the house, in the same stage of proceedings as before the previous ques- 
tion was moved. 

83. One call of house in order, when. On motion for the previous 
question, and prior to the ordering of the main question, one call of 
the house shall be in order; but after proceedings under such call shall 
have been once dispensed with, or after a majority shall have ordered 
the main question, no call shall be in order prior to the decision of 
such question. (Manual, 1011, pp. 07-08.) 

81722—14548 



48 

WTO MING. 

Senate. 

43. Any member may move the previous question, and if it be sec- 
onded by three other members, the previous question shall be put in 
this form: "Shall the main question be now put?" The object of this 
motion is to bring the senate to a vote on the pending question without 
further discussion ; and if the motion fails, the discussion may pro- 
ceed the same as if the motion had not been made ; if carried, all debate 
f-.hall '"ease, and the president shall immediately put the main ques- 
tion to vote: First on proposed amendments in 'their order, and then 
on the main question, without debate on further amendment : Provided, 
That a motion to adjourn and a call of the senate shall each be in 
order after the previous question has been sustained and before the 
main question is put, but no other motion or call shall be in order, 
except to receive the report of the sergeant at arms or to dispense with 
the proceedings under the call, and all motions and proceedings au- 
thorised by this rule shall be decided without debate, whether on appeal 
or otherwise. (Senate Rules, 1915, p. 13.) 

House. 

25. Any member may move the previous question, and if it be sec- 
onded by three other members, the previous question shall be put in 
this form, " The previous question is demanded." The obiect of this 
motion is to bring the house to a vote on the pending question without 
discussion, and if the motion fails, the discussion may proceed the same 
as if the motion had not been made ; if carried, all debate shall cease, 
and the speaker shall immediately put the question to vote ; first, on 
prooosed amendments in their order, and then on the main question, 
without debate or further amendments : Provided. That a motion to 
adjourn and a call of the house shall each be in order after the 
" previous question " has been sustained, and before the main question 
is put. but no other motion or call shall he in order, except to revive 
the report of the sergeant-at-arms, or to dispense with the proceedings 
under the call ; and all motions and proceedings authorized by this 
rule shall be deciriod without debate, whether on appeal or otherwise. 
(House Journal, 1911, p. 78.) 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. Mr. President 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield to the Senator from Nebraska? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Nebraska. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. I wish to ask the Senator whether there 
is not a distinction which he ought to draw between the Senate 
of the United States and these various legislative bodies, and 
also between the Senate of the United States and the House of 
Commons in London, the Reichstag in Berlin, and the Chamber 
of Deputies in Paris? In all of those cases the members vote in 
accordance with their .judgments and their convictions, and 
when they come to a vote you get the vote of the majority. In 
the Senate of the United States, however, in the case of the 
pending bill, you are not permitting Senators to vote in accord- 
ance with their judgments and in accordance with their convic- 
tions. You have held a so-called Democratic caucus, and it is 
notorious that a number of the Democratic Senators here are 
under caucus compulsion to vote against their judgments and 
against their convictions; so that to hold them thus bound and 
then compel a vote is to enable 3G Members of the Senate to 
represent a majority. Now, those 36 Senators do not constitute 
a majority of the Senate, and the caucus rule coupled with the 
cloture would not develop the real sense of the Senate of the 
United States. It would not give to the majority of the Senate 
the decision of the question. It would be a mechanical, artificial 
means of enabling 38 Senators to decide the question. Is not 
that a distinction? 

Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I shall be very glad to answer the 
Senator. I am glad he asked me the question, because it 
81722—14548 



49 

affords me an opportunity to answer, and I wish to answer it 
frankly and with the truth as I understand it. 

I think it the common rule of practice that in all the States 
party caucuses or conferences are used when desired to obtain 
party harmony in party action. 

Under the system that we have of party government, where 
the members of each party line up with complete solidarity on 
either side of the aisle — I may say with complete solidarity, 
because the exception is very rare— where that is the case, and 
where there is a conference or caucus on both sides, it comes 
down to a question of party government ; and party government 
must be controlled by a majority of the members of the party. 
The party then becomes jointly responsible throughout the 
Nation for the action of the party in the Senate and House of 
Representatives. If the party acts unwisely, the Senator from 
Nebraska will be defeated. If it acts wisely, he will not be de- 
feated, under normal conditions. 

That being so, if I have to choose between a Republican 
caucus or a Republican conference and a Democratic caucus 
or a Democratic conference, I will prefer to yield some por- 
tion of my judgment to my own Democratic colleagues and 
go with them upon a public question. If I find that I can not 
in conscience, if I can not as a constitutional duty, go with my 
colleagues, however painful it may be to me, I shall reluctantly 
go my way and take the consequences. But when I yield a part 
of my desire I do so freely and voluntarily for the purpose of 
accomplishing some measure of good rather than by my nega- 
tive self-opinionated action preventing anything from being ac- 
complished. 1 would rather go forward to some extent than try 
to have my own private opinion dominate the majority of my 
colleagues and disrupt them and not get anywhere. 

I think this practice of the Senate in having no cloture, in 
having no time fixed for voting, has destroyed debate in the 
Senate and has driven the debate into a conference room, where 
colleagues can get together and express their minds and hearts 
to each other and arrive at some measure of solidarity. That 
is my opinion about it. I concede to the Senator his right to 
do as he sees fit about it, but I do not find it against my own 
conscience or my own free will to yield something in my judg- 
ment to my party associates. I am glad to do that, because 
they yield something to me also. 

It is a question of mutual compromise between men who are 
affiliated together upon a party basis for the public good, and 
they go to the country upon party performance or party neglect 
or party success in legislation or party defeat in legislation. 
I am not willing to defeat the party that put me in power and 
turn upon them and rend them to pieces. I am not willing to 
disorganize my party and cooperate with Republicans to de- 
feat my party because the majority of my party colleagues do 
not submit to dictation from me. I wish to cooperate with my 
party associates and help them when I can. I certainly would 
not wish to destroy them. I would prefer to be silent if I can 
not agree with them and merely give the reasons why I can not 
go with them. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. Well, I 

Mr. OWEN. Just a moment, and then I will yield further 
to the Senator. What I want to express is that if we had a 

81722—14548 4 



50 

cloture we would restore debate in tlie Senate Chamber, and I 
would then be glad to listen to debate from Members across the 
aisle and learn from them, and I would accept from them any 
proposal that I thought for the common good. In writing the 
Federal reserve act and taking a part in it many things were 
proposed by the Republicans which I gladly accepted, as far as 
I was concerned ; and I gave them open credit for it, too. 

Mr. ' HITCHCOCK. How could the Senator accept it if he 
were restrained by a party caucus? 

Mr. OWEN. I was not restrained or coerced by a party cau- 
cus. I am glad to cooperate of my own free will. I wish the 
Senator could appreciate my sentiment in this matter. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. Well, how could he, in the case of this 
bill, accept it? 

Mr. OWEN. In the case of this bill— the shipping bill— we 
have arrived at a conclusion with regard to what the bill 
ought to be and have agreed upon it among ourselves. It is 
not quite what I would prefer, but I am glad to get this much. 
We have had no method of cooperation with the Republican 
side of the Chamber, who have fought us on every endeavor 
we have made on this and every other bill. They have not 
given us an opportunity. They have lined up solidly and en- 
tered into a secret agreement with some of our own Members 
who were in partial sympathy with them to suddenly and un- 
expectedly unhorse us, and they have given us no opportunity 
for free debate here or listening to them. They have given 
the Democratic Party no opportunity of cooperation, but have 
tried, by using some of our Members, to wrongfully deprive 
the Democracy of its right to control the Government and be 
responsible for government. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. The question which I asked the Senator 
he has not perhaps apprehended, or I think he would have at- 
tempted to answer it. 

Mr. OWEN. I will attempt to answer it now, if the Senator 
will repeat it. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. Let me put it in the form of an illus- 
tration. 

The Nebraska Legislature is in session. It is true that there 
is a limit to debate in that body, but practically every question — 
and I believe I am safe in saying every question — is decided 
upon nonpartisan lines. The real majority of the Nebraska 
Senate, the real majority of the Nebraska House of Representa- 
tives, when it comes to vote, votes in accordance with its con- 
victions — each man in accordance with his convictions. When 
they can so vote it is proper that there should be a cloture; but 
when men are restrained from voting their own convictions, 
when you have a machine, when you have a wheel within a 
wheel, so that 36 men are controlling the votes of 53 men, then 
I doubt very much whether we should have a cloture. 

Mr. OWEN. I do not regard it as controlling my vote when 
I voluntarily cooperate with other men who are my political 
colleagues and yield something of my judgment to them when 
they yield something of their judgment to me. I do not feel 
like asserting every inch and particle of my opinion and un- 
generously yielding nothing whatever to my associates who are 
generous to me, and then say that I am being coerced by others 
because I will not cooperate with them. When I cooperate 

81722—14548 



51 

with my associates I do it voluntarily. I do not do it under' 
compulsion. I do it because I want to do it, and because I 
know it is necessary to party solidarity and to obtaining re- 
sponsible action of my own party, whose future success depends 
on present harmony. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. The Senator is a Democrat, and he be- 
lieves in the rule of the majority? 

Mr. OWEN. I do, most certainly. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. Yet this mechanical device of the party 
caucus destroys the rule of the majority, by giving to 36 men 
the power to vote 53 mea. 

Mr. OWEN. There is a certain measure of truth in what the 
Senator says, and there is also serious deduction or inference 
which is untrue in what the Senator says. If this body con- 
sisted of men chosen upon an open ballot from Nebraska and 
Missouri and , Oklahoma without any party designation, then 
the caucus would be held on this floor. As it is, the power is 
intrusted to a party, and in order to have party action the 
members of it have got to consult among themselves and de- 
termine the party action. You do not determine the party ac- 
tion by consulting with Senators on the other side of the Cham- 
ber who are hostile to the party, who are laying plans wherever 
they can to destroy the party and break it down, in order that 
they may themselves regain control of the country, and who 
show a greater party solidarity than the Democrats ever do. 
In a caucus of 53 men all of the members express their views 
and concede to each other, finally reconciling all differences by a 
majority vote, because that is the only way such differences 
can be reconciled. The implication that an organized majority 
of the 53 members of the caucus get together to tyrannize over 
the minority of the 53 members is entirely false, I verily believe. 
Some members constantly in such conferences find themselves 
now in a majority, now in a minority — and out of mutual con- 
cessions preseut party harmony ensues and future party success 
may be hoped for. 

Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield to the Senator from New Hampshire? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield. 

Mr. GALLINGER. If I understood the Senator correctly, he 
said that the Democratic Party held caucuses and the Repub- 
lican Party held caucuses, and, of course, he would follow his 
own party. 

Mr. OWEN. I used both terms, " caucus " and " conference." 

Mr. GALLINGER. I want to say to the Senator, in all seri- 
ousness, I have been here nearly 24 years and have attended 
every conference when I have been in the city, and the Republi- 
can Party has never undertaken to bind its members to vote 
ou any question whatever. 

Mr. OWEN. That does not seem to have been necessary. 

Mr. GALLINGER. I beg the Senator's pardon. 

Mr. OWEN. I suggested to the Senator that there seemed to 
be no necessity of imposing a rule upon a party which holds its 
party solidarity without a caucus. 

Mr. GALLINGER. That is begging the question. What 1 
meant to say is that in our conferences, when they are dis- 
81722 — 14548 



52 

solved every member of the conference has a right to vote as 
he pleases upon any question before the body. 

Mr. OWEN. I only infer from the record, and assume that 
there is some kind of amiable understanding, which seems to 
be sufficient for that purpose, because no Republican ever votes 
with the Democrats except on the rarest of occasions. They 
vote all together, even when they are obviously wrong and 
even on minor questions. 

Mr. SMOOT and Mr. THOMAS addressed the Chair. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senators will please be in 
order. The business of the Senate can not be conducted when 
more than one Senator is talking at a time. 

Mr. OAVEN. Did the Senator from Utah rise to interrupt 
me? 

Mr. SMOOT. I simply want to add to what the Senator from 
New Hampshire has already stated, that not only has the Re- 
publican Party not held caucuses to bind any Senator, but in 
all the time I have been a Senator of the United States I 
have had no President of the United States ask me to vote any 
way but once, and then President Taft asked me if I could see 
iny way clear to vote for Canadian reciprocity. I told tbe Pres- 
ident I could not, and that I would vote against it. 

Mr. OWEN. May I ask the Senator from Utah a question in 
response? 

Mr. SMOOT. Certainly. 

Mr. OWEN. I merely want to ask the Senator from Utah if 
it is not a fact that the last Republican President refused 
patronage to Republican Senators who did not vote the way 
he wanted them. 

Mr. SMOOT. I am sure he did not. I know he did not refuse 
it to me. I know I voted against Canadian reciprocity and I 
know a majority of the Republicans voted against it, but I 
never have heard 

Mr. OWEN. A letter from the former President's secretary 
was widely published to the effect that the Progressive Repub- 
licans were very much grieved at the time and made quite a 
loud outcry about the treatment they received. 

Mr. SMOOT What the newspapers may say is not always 
true. I wish to say ro the Senator that the only time I was 
ever asked to vote for any measure by any President was by 
President Taft. and he asked me if I could not see my way 
clear to vote for Canadian reciprocity. I told him, " No ; I 
could not " ; and I voted against it and did all I could to defeat 
it, and I know a majority of the Republicans voted against it 
and tried to defeat it ; and I know of none to whom patronage 
was denied, as the Senator has referred to that, because of the 
fact that they voted against Canadian reciprocity. 

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Colorado. 

Mr. THOMAS. I merely wish to say, Mr. President, that 
the public were informed, and I have never seen it successfully 
denied, that the Congress which ended in March, 1911, which 
had a very large Republican majority in both Houses, and 
which was therefore controlled by the Republicans in both 
Houses, seemed to act with singular unanimity, and it was gen- 
erally understood that the Republican majority of the Senate 

81722—14548 



53 

branch of that Congress voted and legislated under the dictation 

of a single man, thus making a caucus unnecessary. 

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. When was that? 

Mr. SMOOT. I should like to ask the Senator a question. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield further? 

Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Utah. 

Mr. SMOOT. What was the bill, or to what legislation has 
the Senator from Colorado reference? 

Mr. THOMAS. I have reference, Mr. President, to the legis- 
lation that was enacted under the domination of the then senior 
Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Aldrich. 

Mr. SMOOT. I suppose the Senator means the tariff bill, and 
I think that he 

Mr. THOMAS. He was the caucus and his mandate was 
your law. 

Mr. SMOOT. Of course, that is an assertion made wholly 
without any truth whatever. I know one thing. I know that he 
was not the caucus for the Senator from Utah and I do not 
believe he was the caucus for anyone else on this side. 

Mr. THOMAS. I do not think that the Senator from Utah 
differed very materially from the Senator from Rhode Island 
during that Congress. My recollection is that he was his chief 
lieutenant. 

Mr. SMOOT. As far as that is concerned, I will say that 
wherever I believe a principle to be right and any other Senator 
may believe the same way I am not going to differ with him, if 
he votes his convictions as I do ; and I believe the Senator will 
admit I always vote what my true convictions are irrespective 
of what any man in the world may think of it or may say. 

Mr. THOMAS. I concede that; but I want Senators to be 
consistent. I vote my convictions, but I am accused of voting 
at the dictation of 36 members of my party. Now, is it possible 
that because 3"6 members of my party meet in caucus — and I am 
not afraid of the word " caucus." Mr. President. I believe in it — 
and because I vote in accordance with what the caucus of my 
party determines after full deliberation, am I to be accused 
also of surrendering my convictions, my freedom of action? It 
remains just the same; and I think my short record in this 
body will demonstrate the fact, notwithstanding that caucuses 
seem at present to be so annoying to those who represent the 
other side and also to some who are on this side of the Chamber. 

Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President 

The PRESIDING- OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla- 
homa yield further to the Senator from Utah? 

Mr. SMOOT. There is just one other statement I desire to 
make. 

Mr. OWEN. I yield. 

Mr. SMOOT. Of course, the Senator from Colorado believes 
in caucuses. I do not. I think some of the worst legislation 
that was ever enacted in Congress has been the result of 
caucuses. 

Mr. THOMAS. Does the Senator believe in conferences? 

Mr. SMOOT. I believe in conferences, but I do not believe 
the conferences should bind anybody who attends them. 

Mr. THOMAS. I have noticed that the conferences which 
already have been held by my Republican friends have re- 
81722—1 4548 



54 

suited in a unanimity of action and of sentiment that is simply 
astonishing. 

Mr. SMOOT. I can say to the Senator from Colorado that 
I have attended many conferences where there was a divided 
vote. I will say this : I do not remember attending a con- 
ference of the Republican Party where there has been a 
unanimity of sentiment. 

Mr. THOMAS. I do not know, of course, what is the 
unanimity of sentiment in the conference. I am talking about 
the unanimity displayed here. 

Mr. SMOOT. I will say to the Senator that there has been 
no conference held on this bill. 

Mr. THOMAS. Then there is a mysterious magnetic some- 
thing wbich seems to act of its own volition and which binds 
our brethren more closely than any caucus even* seems to be 
able to bind this side. 

Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I wish to place in the Record 
at this point the precedents of the English Government, of the 
French Government, of the German Government, of the Aus- 
tria-Hungary Government, of the Austrian Government, and of 
the Governments of Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Portugal, 
Spain, and Switzerland, and, not desiring to take the time of 
the Senate to read them, I will ask to insert them without read- 
ing with the authority from which it is taken. 

The matter referred to is as follows: 

ENGLISH PRECEDENTS. 

" The rule of the majority is the rule in all the parliaments of 
English-speaking people. In the Parliament of Great Britain, 
in the House of Lords, the ' contents ' pass to the right and 
the ' not contents ' pass to the left, and the majority rules. 

"In the House of Commons the 'ayes' pass to the right and 
the 'noes' pass to the left, and the majority rules. (Encych> 
paedia Britannica, vol. 20, p. 856.) 

" Tlie great English statesman, Mr. Gladstone, having found 
that the efficiency of Parliament was destroyed by the right 
of unlimited debate, was led to propose cloture in the first 
week of the session of 18S2, moving this resolution on the 20th 
of February, and expressing the opinion that the house should 
settle its own procedure. The acts of Mr. Gladstone and others 
of like opinion finally led to the termination of unlimited de- 
bate in the procedure of Parliament. In these debates every 
fallacious argument now advanced by those who wish to retain 
unlimited debate in the United States Senate has been abun- 
dantly answered, leaving no ground of sound reasoning to recon- 
sider these stale and exploded arguments. 

" The cloture of debate is very commonly used in the Houses 
of Parliament in Great. Britain; for example, in standing order 
No. 26. The return to order of the House of Commons, dated 
December 12, 1806, shows that the cloture was moved 112 times. 
( See vol. 94, Great Britain House of Commons, sessional papers, 
1906.) 

FRANCE. 

" In France the cloture is moved by one or more members cry- 
ing out ' La cloture ! ' 

" The president immediately puts the question, and if a member of the 
minority wishes to speak he is allowed to assign his reasons against 
81722—14548 



55 

the close of the debate, but no one can speak in support of the motion 
and only one member against it. The question is then put by the 
president, 'Shall the debate be closed?' and if it is resolved in the 
affirmative the debate is closed and the main question is put to the 
vote. 

"M. Guizot, speaking on the efficacy of the cloture before a 
committee of the House of Commons in 1S48, said : 

" I think that in our chamber it was an indispensable power, and I 
think it has not been used unjustly or improperly generally. Calling 
to mind what has passed of late years, I do not recollect any serious 
and bonest complaint of the cloture. In the French Chambers, as they 
have been during the last 34 years, no member can imagine that the 
debate would have been properly conducted without the power of pro- 
nouncing the cloture. 

" He also stated in another part of his evidence that — - 
" Before the introduction of the cloture in 1814 the debates were pro- 
tracted indefinitely, aud not only were they protracted, but at the end, 
when tbe majority wished to put an end to the debate and the minority 
would not. the debate became very violent for protracting the debate, 
and out of the house among the public it was a source of ridicule. 

" The French also allow the previous question, and it can al- 
ways be moved; it can not be proposed on motions for which 
urgency is claimed, except after the report of the committee of 
initiative. (Dickinson's Rules and Procedure of Foreign Par- 
liaments, p. 426.) 

GERMANY. 

" The majority rule controls likewise in the German Empire 
and they have the cloture upon the support of 30 members of 
the house, which is immediately voted on at any time by a 
show of hands or by the ayes and noes. 

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY. 

" In Austria-Hungary motions for the closing of the debate 
are to be put to the vote at once by the president without any 
question, and thereupon the matter is determined. If the ma- 
jority decides for a close of the debate, the members whose 
names are put down to speak for or against the motions may 
choose from amongst them one speaker on each side, and the 
matter is disposed of by voting a simple yes or no. (Ibid., p. 
404.) 

AUSTRIA. 

"Austria also, in its independent houses of Parliament, has 
the cloture, which may be put to the vote at any time in both 
houses, and a small majority suffices to carry it. This is done, 
however, without interrupting any speech in actual course of 
delivery, and when the vote to close the debate is passed each 
side has one member represented in- a final speech on the ques- 
tion. (Ibid., p. 409.) 

BELGIUM. 

" In Belgium they have the cloture, and if the prime minister 
and president of the Chamber are satisfied that there is need of 
closing the debate a hint is given to some member to raise the 
cry of ' La cloture,' after a member of the opposition has con- 
cluded his speech, and upon the demand of 10 members, grant- 
ing permission, however, to speak for or against the motion 
under restrictions. The method here does not prevent any rea- 
sonable debate, but permits a termination of the debate by the 
will of the majority. The same rule is followed in the Senate 
of Belgium. (Dickinson's Rules and Procedure of Foreign Par- 
liaments, p. 420.) 

81722—14548 



56 

DENMARK. 

" In Denmark also they have the cloture, which can be pro- 
posed by the president of the Danish chambers, which is de- 
cided by the chamber without debate. Fifteen members of the 
Landsthing may demand the cloture. (Ibid., p. 422.) 

NETHERLANDS. 

" In both houses of the Parliament of Netherlands they have 
the cloture. Five members of the First Chamber may propose 
it and five members may propose it in the Second Chamber. 
They have the majority rule. (Ibid., p. 461.) 

PORTUGAL. 

" In Portugal they have the cloture in both chambers, and de- 
bate may be closed by a special motion, without discretion. In 
the upper house they permit two to speak in favor of and two 
against it. The cloture may be voted. (Ibid., p. 469.) 

SPAIN. 

" The cloture in Spain may be said to exist indirectly, and to 
result from the action allowed the president on the order of 
parliamentary discussion. (Ibid., p. 477.) 

SWITZERLAND. 

"The cloture exists in Switzerland both in the Conseil des 
Etatc and Conseil National." 

Mr. GALLINGER. Has the Senator the rules or the law gov- 
erning the Canadian Parliament? 

Mr. OWEN. No ; I have not. 

Mr. GALLINGER. They have no previous question, I be- 
lieve ; they have unlimited debate. 

Mr. OWEN. They have no need for it, as there is unanimity 
of sentiment and reciprocal courtesy in their comparatively 
small Parliament. 

Mr. GALLINGER. They succeeded in defeating the reci- 
procity bill because of that fact. 

Mr. OWEN. Oh, I think not "because of that fact," Mr. 
President. Now, Mr. President, I want to call the attention of 
the Senate to an editorial from one of the greatest journals of 
the country that I think is worthy of very respectful attention, 
the New York World of January 29, 1915 : 

SET THE SENATE FREE. 

The Republican minority in the Senate which is attempting to talk 
the ship-purchase bill to death is also attempting to talk majority rule 
to death. If by its filibuster it can prevent action before the expiration 
of Congress on March 4, it will have defeated majority rule as em- 
phatically as would gunmen at a polling place who drove intending 
voters away from the ballot box. 

It is claimed on behalf of this minority that it is exercising the right 
of debate and merely asserting the time-honored privileges of the Senate. 
In truth, it is preventing reasonable debate, and the privileges to which 
it refers ought to be protected from abuse, as they have been by other 
legislative bodies. The British House of Commons, the mother of par- 
liaments, exceedingly jealous of every real right and privilege, throt- 
tles those who would throttle it — 

I commend that sentiment to the attention of the Senate of 
the United States— 

The American House of Representatives has not once been coerced by 
a minority since the Reed rules were established 25 years ago. 

Evidently the time must soon come when a courageous majority of 
the Senate will emancipate itself from a thraldom humiliating alike to 
itself and to the people. Every right properly belonging to minorities 
must be safeguarded, but no minority Las a right to rule, no minority 
has a right to establish by indirection poiicies which it has not the vote's 
81722—14548 



57 

to carry, and no minority anywhere in this country, except In the United 
States Senate, maintains such a pretense. 

The seventeenth amendment, providing for the popular election of 
Senators, was a Democratic measure in its origin, and to the present 
Democratic administration fell the honor of proclaiming its adoption. 
Why should not the same party complete the reform by such a revision 
of the Senate rules as to strip of power those who obstruct the popular 
will lawfully expressed? 

Now, Mr. President, I want to say just one or two words 
before I close. Some of our Democratic brethren in the South, 
still haunte* by the old fear of a force bill led by the Senator 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Lodge], believe that it would be dan- 
gerous to abandon the alleged right of the minority to conduct 
an endless filibuster and thereby obstruct anything to which 
the minority seriously objects. What I want to call to the 
attention of the Senate is that under the change of the Con- 
stitution providing for the direct election of Senators by popu- 
lar vote the Senate of the United States never can again be 
made the instrumentality of privilege or plutocracy or monop- 
oly or organized greed; never can again, by a majority of this 
body, be controlled against the interests and the welfare of the 
common people of this country. The majority always in the 
future, till time shall be no more, will represent in truth the 
sovereignty of the common people of this country. That being 
so, I do not ses how a man who is a heartfelt Democrat can 
reconcile it to his conscience to put in the hands of those who 
are at heart opposed to the sovereignty of the people the right 
to obstruct their will and prevent legislation which the people 
desire. 

I have said on the floor to the Senator from New York [Mr. 
Root] that this filibuster was preventing the presentation of 
the rural credits bill. What is the use of a committee bringing 
forward a bill that has no possible chance of consideration? If 
that were possible now, if we had a reasonable cloture* the 
Banking and Currency Committee could get together and in all 
probability agree upon some measure acceptable to them, ac- 
ceptable to the Senate, and acceptable to the country. But that 
is a small part of the terrible harm being done. This fili- 
buster is not only preventing the rural credits bill from be- 
ing considered ; it is preventing this whole calendar, page after 
page, of listed bills that are important to the country, from 
receiving any consideration at all. This body is presenting the 
strange, unthinkable,, sad spectacle to the country that a 
majority is willing to stay here all day and all night, night 
after night, in order to exercise the constitutional privilege of 
voting their wishes as representatives of the people of the 
United States, while an organized filibuster prevents the ma- 
jority rule; prevents even a vote. 

We can not consider rural credits, good roads, waterways, 
justice to labor, the employment of the unemployed, the public 
health, and the many vital questions affecting the conservation 
and development of human life and energy. We are paralyzed 
by partisan bigotry and ambition. 

I say to the Senate that the people of the United States are 
not going to submit to this wrong any more. It is an outrage 
on justice ; it is shameful ; it is despicable ; and no words within 
the scope of a parliamentary language are strong enough to ex- 
press my condemnation of it. 

I yield the floor. Mr. President. 
81722 — 14548 



58 

ADDENDUM. 

[From the North American Review of November, 1893.] 

The Struggle in the Senate. 

ii. obstruction in the senate. 

[By Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, of Massachusetts.] 

Parliamentary obstruction has of late years engaged public attention 
to a degree quite unusual for a subject so technical in its nature. 
When tbe Reed rules, wbich first brougbt tbe subject into prominence in 
this country, were under discussion, I pointed out in an article in the 
Nineteenth Century that tbe question was widespread and general and 
in no sense local or peculiar to the United States. At that time the 
Democratic orators and the Democratic newspapers seemed to think 
that the effort to do away with parliamentary obstruction in the House 
of Representatives was a malignant invention of the Republican Party 
and particularly of Mr. Reed. If they had taken the trouble to inform 
themselves — a form of mental exercise in which they rarely indulge — • 
they would have discovered that it was nothing of the sort. They 
would have learned what is now evident to all men that the Republican 
reform of the rules of the House was but part of a general movement 
against an abuse which in the process of time had become intolerable. 
Not only in many States of the Union but in England also the matter 
of parliamentary obstruction had reached the proportion of a great and 
a very grave public question. This was neither accidental nor the 
result of partisanship. It was the outgrowth of conditions which had 
been slowly developed. 

The English-speaking race are the originators of free representative 
government. Among them this great system has grown to maturity 
and by them its details have been gradually elaborated. The funda- 
mental principles of popular representation and of free speech, of the 
control of taxation, and of public expenditures, were established long 
since as the result of many hard-fought battles. With this development 
of representative government there should have gone hand in hand a 
development of the rules by which the representative bodies transacted 
their business. This, however, did not occur. As so often happens in 
history, the substance of things changed, but the forms survived. 
While the power and the business of representative bodies both in 
England and the United States expanded enormously, the rules in 
accordance with which these powers were exercised and this business 
transacted remained unaltered. Ordinarily forms are not of much con- 
sequence provided the essence of things is preserved, but in this in- 
stance it happened that forms and rules were of vital importance, al- 
though it is only very recently that this fact has been fully and prop- 
erly realized. 

The rules and practices of the Congress of the United States and of 
the House of Commons were adopted under conditions widely different 
from those which exist to-day. They were formed for representative 
bodies, in this country at least, much smaller in number, and for the 
management of the public affairs of small populations, with industrial 
and commercial interests absolutely insignificant when compared with 
the vast volume of business to-day, quickened as it now is by the tele- 
graph and the railroad, and beating with a pulsation which is felt in 
every corner of the globe within 24 hours. The result has been that the 
old rules and forms have not only proved inadequate for the transaction 
of business, but have furnished the means for indefinite resistance to 
action. When parliamentary rules were first formulated, the preserva- 
tion of freedom of debate was rightly considered to be of the last im- 
portance, and, so far as these original rules, which were in great de- 
gree haphazard, could be said to have any principle, the protection of 
freedom of debate was their controlling purpose. All danger to freedom 
of debate in English-speaking countries at least has long since van- 
ished, and the tendency of the old system is to encourage debate, of 
which there is now too much, and to prevent action, of which there is 
now too little. 

The primary and the only proper and intelligent object of all par- 
liamentary law and rules is to provide for and to facilitate the ordi- 
nary action of public business. When any set of parliamentary rules 
ceases to accomplish this object they have become an abuse — and an 
abuse of the worst kind. They not only prevent action, but, what is 
far worse, they destroy responsibility ; for, if a minority can prevent 
action, the majority, which is entitled to rule and is intrusted with 
power, is at once divested of all responsibility, the great safeguard of 
free representative institutions. 
81722—14548 



59 

This question has been fought out in the English House of Commons 
and the passage of the home rule bill is conclusive evidence that the 
system of enforcing action is not only necessary in England, but that 
it is finally and firmly established. The same battle has been fought 
out also, and the same result attained, in our own House of Repre- 
sentatives. The great reform which Mr. Reed carried through and 
which marks an epoch in parliamentary government in the United 
States has been in principle finally established. Received at the mo- 
ment with much passionate oratory and many loud objurgations, such 
as always accompany the onward march and the ultimate triumph of a 
great reform, it has at last prevailed. As the dust of that memorable 
conflict cleared away, it was discovered that Mr. Reed had only been 
enforcing principles which were accepted in nearly every other parlia- 
mentary body in the world and that he had not invented them himself 
for the m,ere gratification of a tyrannical spirit. Then it was further 
disco. ered that his methods, instead of being illegal and unconstitu- 
tional, had received the sanction of every judicial body before which 
they had been brought, and they were finally upheld by the unanimous 
decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. 

The last stage, the acceptance of the reform by the opposite political 
party, has just been passed. Mr. Speaker Crisp, with a large Demo- 
cratic majority at his back, has enforced Mr. Reed's principles by stop- 
ping dilatory motions and bringing the House to a vote. The only dif- 
ference has been that Mr. Reed put his principles into practice under 
accepted methods and in accordance with parliamentary law, while Mr. 
Crisp very unnecessarily, because no such violence was required, en- 
forced action with entire disregard of the usual and proper forms. He 
is not, however, to be too severely criticized for this. It was quite 
natural that the Democratic Party in the House should writhe at 
adopting the principles and carrying into effect the very methods which 
they had denounced so exuberantly only three years ago. They ap- 
peared to think that they could get around by some bypath to the Re- 
publican result, and thus escape a march through the valley of humilia- 
tion, if they discarded the forms under which their adversaries had 
performed the same work. Unfortunately such evasions are never pos- 
sible and the valley of humiliation can not be avoided by those who 
have opposed what is righteous, and then, after a short interval, have 
accepted righteousness for their own purposes. In any event the result 
is the same. The right of the majority to rule, and to pass after due 
debate such measures as it sees fit, has been firmly established in the 
House of Representatives. 

As a practical public question in the United States, parliamentary ob- 
struction has now shifted to the Senate, where it has aroused lately the 
keenest public interest owing to the condition of business and the in- 
tense eagerness of the country for the passage of some measure of re- 
lief. The case in the Senate is very different in many particulars from 
what it was either in the House of Commons or the House of Repre- 
sentatives. The Senate of the United States is still a small body : it 
has great powers conferred upon it by the Constitution and weighty 
responsibility. It is properly very conservative in its habits and very 
slow to change those habits in any direction. There could be no 
better example of this than in its parliamentary procedure. The rules 
of the Senate are practically unchanged from what they were at the 
beginning. They are the same now to all intents and purposes as 
when they were first adopted more than a hundred years ago. There 
has never been in the Senate any rule which enabled the majority to 
close debate or compel a vote. The previous question, which existed 
in the earliest years, and was abandoned in 1806, was the previous 
question of England and not that with which every one is familiar 
to-day in our House of Representatives. It was not in practice a form 
of closure and it is therefore correct to say that the power of closing 
debate in the modern sense has never existed in the Senate. 

The rules of the Senate are few and simple. Formed for the use of 
a body of 26 Senators, they have continued in force unchanged, until 
they now govern the deliberations of 88. That rules so simple should 
have worked so well during so long a period with an increasing number 
of Senators and an enormous growth in the volume of business is no 
slight tribute to the character of the body which has worked under 
them. But they are now beginning to show the same defects and abuses, 
arising from the same causes, which have produced such fundamental 
changes in larger representative bodies. 

The rules of the Senate, providing for no form of compulsion, rest 
necessarily on courtesy. In other words, as there is no power to compel 
action, it is assumed that the need for compulsion will never arise. 
81722—14548 



60 

For this reason, obstruction in the Senate, when it has occurred, has 
never taken the form of dilatory motions and continual roll calls, which 
have been the accepted method of filibustering in the House. The 
weapon of obstruction in the Senate is debate, upon which the Senate 
rules place no check whatever. Practically speaking, under the rules, 
or rather the courtesy of the Senate, each Senator can speak as often 
and at as great length as he chooses. There is not only no previous 
question to cut him off, but a time can not even be set for taking a 
vote, except by unanimous consent. This is all very well in theory, 
and there is much to be said for the maintenance of a system, in one 
branch at least of the Government, where debate shall be entirely un- 
trammeled. But the essence of a system of courtesy is that it should 
be the same at all points. The two great rights in our representative 
bodies are voting and debate. If the courtesy of unlimited debate is 
granted it must carry with it the reciprocal courtesy of permitting a 
vote after due discussion. If this is not the case tbe system is im- 
possible. Of the two rights, moreover, that of voting is the higher and 
more important. We ought to have both, and debate certainly in ample 
measure ; but, if we are forced to choose between them, the right of 
action must prevail over the right of discussion. To vote without de- 
bating is perilous, but to debate and never vote is imbecile. The dif- 
ficulty in the Senate to-day is that, while the courtesy which permits 
unlimited debate is observed, the reciprocal courtesy, which should in- 
sure the opportunity to vote, is wholly disregarded. 

If the system of reciprocal courtesy could he reestablished and ob- 
served, there need be no change in the Senate rules. As it is, there 
must be a change, for the delays which now take place are discrediting 
the Senate and this is something greatly to be deplored. The Senate was 
perhaps the greatest single achievement of the makers of the Constitu- 
tion. . It is one of the strongest bulwarks of our system of government, 
and anything which lowers it in the eyes of the people is a most serious 
matter. How the Senate may vote on any given question at any given 
time is of secondary importance, but when it is seen that it is unable 
to take any action at all the situation becomes of the gravest character. 
A body which can not govern itself will not long hold the respect of the 
people who have chosen it to govern the country. 

No extreme or violent change is needed in order to remedy the exist- 
ing condition of affairs. A simple rule giving the majority power to 
fix a time for taking a vote upon any measure which has been before 
the Senate and under discussion, say for SO days, would be all sufficient. 
Such a change should be made and such a rule passed, for the majority 
ought to have and must have full power and responsibility. 

On this point of the power of the majority, however, there is a great 
deal of popular misconception. It is customary to assail with bitter 
reproaches, as we have seen during the struggle over silver repeal, the 
minority who are resisting action. This is putting the blame in the 
wrong place. The minority may be justly censured for not conforming 
to a system of courtesy, but when that system has been overthrown, as 
is the case in the Senate in regard to voting and debate, the fault is no 
longer theirs. No minority is ever to blame for obstruction. If the 
rules permit them to obstruct, they are lawfully entitled to use those 
rules in order to stop a measure which they deem injurious. The blame 
for obstruction rests with the majority, and if there is obstruction it is 
because the majority permit it. The majority to which I here refer is 
the party majority in control of the Chamber. They may be divided on 
a given measure, but they, and they alone, are responsible for the gen- 
eral conduct of business. They, and they alone, can secure action and 
initiate proceedings to bring the body whose machinery they control to 
a vote. The long delay on the repeal of the purchasing clause of the 
silver act of 1890 has been due, without any reference to their internal 
divisions on the pending question, solely to the Democratic majority 
as a whole in full control of the Chamber and of the machinery of 
legislation. There never was a time when they could not have brought 
about a vote with the assistance of the Chair, whose occupant was also 
of their party, if, as a party, they had only chosen to do so. 

No further argument is, I think, needed to show the necessity of 
some rule which, after allowing the most liberal latitude of debate, will 
yet enable the majority of the "Senate to compel a vote. The prospects, 
however, of any such change are not very promising. It is not prob- 
able that any form of closure will be adopted by the Senate for some 
time to come. It will certainly never he attained unless the popular 
demand for it is not only urgent but intelligent. Newspapers and peo- 

Ele generally ha-ve a way of rising up and demanding that filibustering 
e put down and closure enforced whenever some measure in which 
81722—14548 



61 . 

they are specially Interested at the moment Is obstructed. On the other 
hand, filibustering is often regarded as very patriotic by people who do 
not want a given measure to pass. Many of the newspapers, for ex- 
ample, which have been shouting themselves hoarse over the obstruc- 
tion to silver repeal in the Senate, loudly applauded precisely the same 
methods of obstruction when directed against the Federal elections bill a 
few years ago. It is this fact which takes all weight from the de- 
mands of the most vociferous shouters for action at the present time. 
Obstruction must be always good and proper or always bad and im- 
proper. It can not be sometimes good and sometimes bad as a prin- 
ciple of action. If the power to close debate is righteous for one meas- 
ure it is righteous for all ; and until that principle is accepted there is 
no possibility of reform. For example, the Democratic majority in the 
Senate refuses to change the rules in order to pass silver repeal. They 
can not, then, go on and introduce closure to pass the Federal elections 
bill and the tariff. They must apply closure to all or none. 

The only way in which proper rules for the transaction of business 
in the Senate can be obtained will be through the action of a party 
committed as a party to the principle that the majority must rule, and 
that the parliamentary methods of the Senate must conform to that 
principle. The change must also be made at the beginning of the ses- 
sion, so as to apply to all measures alike which are to come before Con- 
gress, and it must be carried and established on its own merits as a 
general principle of government and not to suit a particular exigency. 
Whenever this reform is made it will come and it can come only in this 
way. 

Henky Cabot Lodge. 
81722—14548 



! 



? 



*■*■** 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



005 894 343 5 



